SELECTMEN’S MEETING

JANUARY 8, 2007

 

Chairman Perkins called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM.

 

Selectman Andrews, Selectwoman Brunelle, and Selectman Spataro were present.

Selectman Bond was absent.

 

 

SELECTMEN’S MINUTES

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Minutes of December 13, 2006.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Executive Minutes of December 13, 2006.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Minutes of December 18, 2006.

            VOTE 2 – 0 – 2 (Selectman Spataro and Selectman Andrews abstained)

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Executive Minutes of December 18, 2006.

            VOTE 2 – 0 – 2 (Selectman Spataro and Selectman Andrews abstained)

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Minutes of January 2, 2007.

            VOTE 3 – 0 – 1 (Selectwoman Brunelle abstained)

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Executive Minutes of January 2, 2007.

            VOTE 3 – 0 – 1 (Selectwoman Brunelle abstained)

 

HEARINGS, MEETINGS & LICENSES

 

Hearing – Request for WRPD Permit – Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc. – Tispaquin Street – Lot1

 

Chairman Perkins read the following:  “The Board of Selectmen will hold a public hearing in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room at the Town Hall, 10 Nickerson Avenue, Middleborough, MA  on Monday, January 8, 2007 at 7:05 PM, for the purpose of discussing an application filed by Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc., P.O. Box 41, West Wareham, MA  02576  for a Special Permit under the Water Resource Protection District By-law, to allow construction of a portion of driveway within 25 feet of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland (BVW) to access a single family home (Lot 1).  The property is located on Tispaquin Street, Assessors Map 053 Lot 2044 f/k/a 2074, zoned RR, W.R.P.D. “Z4”.   Anyone wishing to be heard on this matter should appear at the time and place designated.”  The hearing was opened.

 

Darrin Michaelis, Outback Engineering, was present.  He returned the green cards.

 

Mr. Michaelis explained that two (2) new lots are being created for single family homes.  The proposal is to allow the construction of a portion of driveway that is within 25’ of Bordering Vegetated Wetland (BVW).  The driveway will allow access to a single family home on Lot 1 and be a common driveway allowing access to a second single family home (Lot 2).

 

Mr. Michaelis said the only other access to the property would require 4x the amount of disturbance than is being requested.

 

Mr. Michaelis said the only work to be done in the BVW will be to remove and replace a portion for the driveway.

 

Chairman Perkins read letters from Department Heads into the record.

 

The Treasurer/Collector confirmed that there are no outstanding municipal charges on the property.

 

Bob Whalen, Building Commissioner, had no comments on the project.

 

Jeanne Spalding, Health Inspector, said that acceptable percs had been conducted on the referenced site for the construction of two (2) septic systems.

 

Ms. Spalding said it was unclear from the filing as to how the application conforms to Z4-section d. of the WRPD Bylaw for work within 25’ of a wetland.  She said it appeared that the entire scope of construction for both lots lies within a BVW to be reviewed by the ConCom for compliance with Wetlands Protection Act.

 

Ruth Geoffroy, Town Planner, said that “the WRPD Zoning By-law does not allow a Special Permit to be issued for the construction of a driveway within 25’ of a wetland.  This would require a Zoning Variance.  The By-law only allows a Special Permit to be granted if the alteration involves: (i) a limited project as defined by 310 CMR 10.53 (3); (ii) creation of wetland replacement or flood storage area; (iii) installation of drainage outfalls or outlet swales where no alternative is feasible…; and, (iv) maintenance and construction of trails… public parks….  Construction of a common driveway to access two new residential homes does not qualify for a Special Permit.”

 

Mr. Healey said he had met with Mr. Whalen and Ms. Geoffroy today.  He said, technically, Ms. Geoffroy is correct.  He said it is a “catch 22 situation”.  He said the Bylaw, as written, forces people to make a more significant intrusion into the wetland to comply.  He said 2 lots can be developed under the Bylaw in a more intrusive manner.  He said the suggestion was made to ask the applicant if it would be possible to secure a strip of land on the abutting property, or an easement, so that the driveway could be placed outside the 25’ area.

 

Mr. Michaelis that “chances are this would not be the case”.  He noted that the entire driveway would have to be placed on the abutter’s property.

 

Mr. Healey asked about “swapping land”.

 

Mr. Michaelis said he could ask.

 

Selectman Andrews said this would result in the same situation.  He also didn’t think the abutters would “go out of their way to help”.

 

Mr. Michaelis said that the Bylaw forces the applicant to cross the wetlands, disturbing 3x the area.

 

Mr. Healey said the problem is “that’s what we’ve got”.

 

Mr. Healey asked about a common driveway on the crossing.

 

Mr. Michaelis said that could be done.  It would be 80’ draining in the wetlands.  This would fall under “limited access”.  He said he was trying to avoid disturbing the wetlands to cause less of a disturbance area.

 

Mr. Healey asked if the Conservation Commission would consider this a limited access project.

 

Mr. Michaelis said if the crossing was shown.

 

Mr. Healey said intruding on the wetland would make it a limited project.

 

Mr. Michaelis said the intent of the Bylaw is to avoid all crossings.

 

Mr. Healey asked if it could meet the qualifications of limited access.

 

Mr. Michaelis said yes, explaining that it falls within 25’ of the buffer zone.  He said if the crossing could be shown in Lot 1 then ConCom would deny it.

 

Mr. Healey said the application cannot be approved because it doesn’t meet the qualifications, even though it makes more sense from a wetlands impact.  He suggested that the Permit could be approved on the condition that the ConCom agrees that the intrusion is a limited project.

 

Mr. Michaelis said the ConCom had requested the applicant to go before the Selectmen first.

 

Selectman Andrews said the Board couldn’t approve the Permit based on that scenario as it would require a zoning variance.

 

Mr. Healey said it accepted as necessary for limited projects.

 

Selectman Andrews asked if the applicant had been notified of the concerns of Department Heads prior to tonight’s meeting.

 

Mr. Michaelis said he had, explaining that he believes the applicant qualifies.

 

Mr. Healey said he couldn’t be sure until he goes through the ConCom.

 

Hearing no further comments, Chairman Perkins closed the hearing.

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

      VOTED:  To approve the request filed by Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc., P.O. Box 41,      West Wareham, MA  02576 for a Special Permit under the Water Resource         Protection District By-law, to allow construction of a portion of driveway within   25 feet of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland (BVW) to access a single family home          (Lot 1) for property located on Tispaquin Street, Assessors Map 053 Lot 2044           f/k/a 2074, zoned RR, W.R.P.D. “Z4”, subject to the Conservation Commission’s   approving a limited project activity.  The Board further found that the project is

a.       Is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the WRPD By-law and will promote the purposes of the Water Resource Protection Districts.

b.      Is appropriate to the natural topography, soil, and other characteristics of the site to be developed.

c.       Will not, during construction or thereafter, have an adverse environmental impact on the aquifer or recharge areas, and

d.      Will not adversely affect any existing or potential water supply.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Hearing – Request for WRPD Permit – Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc. – Tispaquin StreetLot 2

 

Chairman Perkins read the following:  “The Board of Selectmen will hold a public hearing in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room at the Town Hall, 10 Nickerson Avenue, Middleborough, MA  on Monday, January 8, 2007 at 7:15 PM, for the purpose of discussing an application filed by Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc., P.O. Box 41, West Wareham, MA  02576  for a Special Permit under the Water Resource Protection District By-law, to allow construction of a portion of driveway within 25 feet of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland (BVW) to access a single family home (Lot 2).  The property is located on Tispaquin Street, Assessors Map 053 Lot 2077 f/k/a 2074, zoned RR, W.R.P.D. “Z4”.   Anyone wishing to be heard on this matter should appear at the time and place designated.”  The hearing was opened.

 

Darrin Michaelis, Outback Engineering, was present.  He returned the green cards.

 

Chairman Perkins noted that this was the same project as discussed in the previous hearing.  He asked if there were any further comments.  Hearing none, he closed the hearing.

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

      VOTED:  To approve the request filed by Beaton LeBaron Co., Inc., P.O. Box 41,      West Wareham, MA  02576 for a Special Permit under the Water Resource         Protection District By-law, to allow construction of a portion of driveway within   25 feet of a Bordering Vegetative Wetland (BVW) to access a single family home          (Lot 2) for property located on Tispaquin Street, Assessors Map 053 Lot 2077           f/k/a 2074, zoned RR, W.R.P.D. “Z4”, subject to the Conservation Commission’s   approving a limited project activity.  The Board further found that the project is

a.       Is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the WRPD By-law and will promote the purposes of the Water Resource Protection Districts.

b.      Is appropriate to the natural topography, soil, and other characteristics of the site to be developed.

c.       Will not, during construction or thereafter, have an adverse environmental impact on the aquifer or recharge areas, and

d.      Will not adversely affect any existing or potential water supply.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Meeting with Lisa Bellefeille – RE:  Dog Complaint

 

Lisa Bellefeille was present.  The Board had sent a letter to Ms. Bellefeille notifying her that a hearing was held on Monday, November 27, 2006 to discuss the written complaint filed by Heather Fuller, 185 Thompson Street, and/or the Animal Control Officer, claiming a vicious dog, of which she had been named the owner.

 

As a result of that hearing, and in conjunction with MGL Chapter 140 Section 157, the Board ordered the following conditions, in addition to the previous Restraining Order that was placed on the dog:

 

1.                  Three (3) chain link enclosures, size appropriate, are to be constructed within 30 days of this order.  The structures are to contain the dog, the goat, and the chickens.

2.                  Town Counsel will file a complaint in District Court for an unlicensed and unvaccinated animal.

 

The Board requested a meeting with Ms. Bellefeille to demonstrate the steps she has taken to comply with this order.

 

Chairman Perkins also read a letter from Jayson Tracy, Animal Control Officer, who could not be present at tonight’s meeting.

 

Mr. Tracy said that, since the Selectmen’s order, Ms. Bellefeille has had her dog vaccinated and licensed through the Clerk’s Office negating the need to bring her to court.  He also has not received any further complaints against the animals.  He said he had not had a chance to view the accommodations that have been set up for the animals.

 

Ms. Bellefeille requested a copy of the letter that had been sent by Heather Fuller, the complainant.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle noted that Ms. Bellefeille had not attended the previous hearing on November 27th at which testimony was heard from Ms. Fuller.  She noted Ms. Fuller’s concern as she runs a daycare on her property.

 

Ms. Bellefeille said Ms. Fuller was award of the animals when she purchased her property in 2002.

 

Selectman Andrews asked if Ms. Bellefeille felt it was appropriate for her animals to run onto the abutter’s property.

 

Ms. Bellefeille said the chickens are not hers.  She suggested they may have gotten loose from the 4H property.  She said she no longer has the goat.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle said it appears Ms. Bellefeille has taken action. 

 

Selectman Andrews suggested Mr. Tracy do an inspection.

 

Ms. Bellefeille said she had purchased three (3) chain link fences totaling $1137.

 

Mr. Healey asked where the goat was.

 

Ms. Bellefeille said she “ate him”.

 

Selectman Spataro suggested Ms. Bellefeille could make a request for information through the Board’s Secretary.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the Board

            VOTED:  To instruct the Animal Control Officer to do an inspection on the        property to resolve the issue.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Order of Conditions E.R. Permit #06-7 – W.L. Byrne, Inc. – Chestnut Street

 

The Board reviewed the Order of Conditions for Earth Removal Permit #06-7 which was approved at the Board’s meeting on December 18, 2006.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the Order of Conditions as presented.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Meeting with School Superintendent – RE:  Budget

 

Superintendent Robert Sullivan was present.  He noted that some teachers and students were also present.

 

Dr. Sullivan told the Board that he had sent a letter to the CLG last June urging them to meet “sooner than later” after the Town Meeting budget process.  He hoped to talk about all departments budgets early to determine if an override was needed.  Two (2) meetings were held that Summer.  Part of the discussion was to prepare budgets sooner, by November 1st, to bring to the CLG to look at where we would like to be in 2 – 3 years. 

 

Dr. Sullivan said the School Department has “pulled back” its budget in the last few years.  The budget that was prepared for the CLG “looked ahead” and reflected the premise that the Town would move forward with a 2 ½ override.  He was told that the School Department budget might have to be cut.  He noted that this is not the “normal budget process” as the School Committee is still working on the upcoming budget.  He said the numbers used were “speculative” to show where the School Departments wants to be in 2 – 3 years.  It addresses concerns from previous years.

 

Dr. Sullivan gave a presentation to the Board, noting the presentation is also posted on the School Department’s website.

 

The discussion included a “Draft FY08 Preliminary Budget Developed in Consideration of a Possible Proposition 2 ½ Override”.  Information included Historical Data, Operational Budget History, Chapter 70 State Aid FY93-FY07, Indirect Costs, School Finance Reform, Fiscal Year 2006 Revenue Components, Academic and Curriculum Concerns, MCAS, and an Impact Statement.

 

Dr. Sullivan detailed the proposed requested budget, which included several new positions.

 

Selectman Andrews said he had the utmost respect for Dr. Sullivan and the dedication of the School Committee, but felt he was being “ambushed” by the document that had been provided at tonight’s meeting.  He noted that the Board has been invited to attend the School Committee’s January 11th meeting.

 

Dr. Sullivan said he was here at the request of the Board.  He said he was here to give information and answer questions.

 

Dr. Sullivan the additional $2.4 million looks like a lot of money, but $1.3 is the recommended budget that sat on the table for the last few years.  He said this is where the School Department needs to go.  He said he was disappointed that, approached Town Meeting, there is not the same support as has been in the past.  He said the Schools “cannot go backwards” noting the effects of what happened in 1991 and 1992.  He said it takes years to get things back.

 

Chairman Perkins said it was important to get the message out.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle noted the Board will also have an informational hearing regarding a proposed override on January 29th.  She said she didn’t have all information from General Government budgets yet. 

 

Selectman Spataro asked Dr. Sullivan to comment on what, specifically, would be the impact of not getting what he was asking for.

 

Dr. Sullivan said he wouldn’t answer specifically.  He said the School Committee would have to listen to recommendations given by the administration.  He said it was “premature” to say what happens if there weren’t an override.

 

Dr. Sullivan noted that, last year, the Board had decided there was no way to prepare an override in the time frame for a November ballot.  He said nothing has changed.  He read a statement that included a quote from President John Adams “Laws for the liberal education of youth…are so extremely wise and useful that to a humane and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant”.

 

Mr. Healey said he agreed with the statement, but needed to “put it in context”.  He said the Town has spent over $1.75 million above the required net school spending.  He said this is necessary to “prevent disastrous back sliding” and should continue.  He said the problem is we can’t spend the same dollars twice.  He said the money won’t be there.  He noted the general government needs and increased fringe benefits costs.  He said an override is being talked about to “buy additional services” to maintain the quality of services that we have.  He said residents are being asked to pay more in taxes, and this is not the “optimum time” to ask for an override.  He said it needs to be framed as an obligation to let the public know what they won’t get if we don’t come up with more money.  He said the Town could be “in the hole” by as much as $5 million.

 

Selectman Andrews said it is “tough to argue” impact statements. 

 

Maria Scott, a resident, said there are “two (2) colliding but related issues”.  He said the democratic process should allow voters the opportunity to decide. 

 

Mr. Healey said people need to be told what they’ll need to dig deeper for.

 

Selectman Andrews said he intended on being at the School Committee meeting on Thursday.

 

NEW BUSINESS

 

Request to Approve One Year Extension – E.R Permit #04-1 – O’Connor – (off) Rocky Meadow Street

 

Mr. Healey noted that this Permit expired at the end of last year.  A one (1) year extension is necessary to continue.  He said he was in favor of the request.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle asked if there had been any issues or problems with the Permit.

 

Mr. Healey said there had been problems with complaints of noise from the pumps.  Structures have been constructed to muffle the noise.  He said this was not a problem at the last inspection.

 

Chairman Perkins asked if the project could be completed within a year.

 

Mr. Healey said yes.

 

Selectman Andrews asked if there have been any affect on neighbors’ wells.

 

Mr. Healey said ground water monitoring has been done.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the request for a one (1) year extension to Earth Removal           Permit #04-1.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Selectman Andrews said he took exception to the fact that the applicant did not attend the meeting.

 

Chairman Perkins noted that approvals have been given in the past.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board           

            VOTED:  To make it a policy, going forward, that applicants must attend the     meetings requesting an extension for Earth Removal Projects.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Request to Approve Septic Betterment Request – Pierce/Moakley – 5 Whittner Avenue

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED :  To approve and sign a Septic Betterment Agreement for property     located at 5 Whittner Avenue for $16,925.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Town’s Option to Purchase Chapterland – Milky Way Farm Realty Trust

 

Attorney Craig Medeiros was present.

 

He explained that this petition had previously been brought to the board about a year ago.  The Board decided to forgo its right to purchase.  He said that petition had referenced existing liens on the property.

 

Tonight’s request includes a total of 13 liens on record for the property.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To decline the Board’s option to purchase property owned by Milky             Way Farm Realty Trust, previously declined on September 23, 2006, as             referenced in a notice to the Board from Attorney          Craig Medeiros.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Request to Use Townhall Lawn – Rotary Club

 

The Rotary Club will be notified that there is no fee for the use of the Town Hall lawn for its annual craft fair.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle said she would volunteer to open and close the building for the use of restrooms.

 

Dedication of the Annual Town Report

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the Board

            VOTED:  To dedicate the 2006 Annual Town Report to John F. Healey, Town             Manager.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Request for Appointment – COA Board of Directors

 

Linda Bullard and Ted Lang were present.

 

Mr. Lang explained that Ms. Bullard had been a previous Board of Director for the COA.  She had also been a paid staff member and is very knowledgeable with the history, upgrades and budget for the COA.

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the Board

            VOTED:  To appoint Linda Bullard to the Council on Aging Board of Directors             to fill the vacancy for the remaining time of Ms. Deanna Simmons-Hayes, who no            longer resides in Middleboro.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To send a letter of thanks to Deanna Simmons-Hayes for her many    ears of service to the Town of Middleborough.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

12 Highland Street (waiting for decision)

 

 

 

Downtown Parking

 

Selectwoman Brunelle asked Mr. Healey to look at the parking at the intersection of Oak and Centre Streets.  She noted the difficulty of seeing oncoming traffic when vehicles are parked on the corner when heading towards North Street from Oak Street.

 

Chairman Perkins said the problem also exists coming the other way.  He believed the vehicles were illegally parked.

 

Mr. Healey said he would look at the problem.

 

Lakeville IMA

 

Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the Board

            VOTED:  To authorize Selectman Andrews to work with Mr. Healey to get a    draft agreement for an IMA with the Town of Lakeville.

            Unanimous Vote.’

 

TOWN MANAGER’S REPORT

 

Middleborough Home Rules

 

Mr. Healey said new votes are needed from the Board for the Middleborough Home Rules that are being filed.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve the filing of Home Rule Petitions consisting of An Act        Authorizing the Town of Middleborough to Deposit Certain Tax Payments            Received into its Land Acquisition Fund, An Act Authorizing the Town of            Middleborough to Convey Town-Owned Conservation Land in Exchange for Other          Land to be Used as Conservation and Recreation Land, and An Act Authorizing the   Town of Middleborough to Use a Portion of Town-Owned Land     for Purposes Other        Than Water Supply Protection and Storage (wording attached).

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle asked Mr. Healey to check with Town Counsel to be sure nothing else is required.

 

Alden Shoe Company

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To approve Alden Shoe Company’s request for permission for a water          main connection to be installed solely for the current single-family residence at 9           Taunton Street (Houlihan, J.) as outlined in a letter from Arthur Tarlow, President           of Alden Shoe.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Water Development Charge and Other New Revenue Improvement Proposals

 

Mr. Healey read the following from his Report:

 

Board members will remember that, periodically, we have noted the need to increase the Water Development Charge.  This is the amount of money we charge to new customers to cover the Town’s cost to develop new water resources.  The idea behind it is that existing customers should not be burdened with the expense to develop new water resources to serve new customers.  That burden should fall on the new customers.

 

The last time – the only time – that we set the amount of the water development charge was in 1989!  We are way overdue in updating (increasing) this charge to new customers.  In recent years, there was some thought to postpone increasing the charge until the agreement with National Development and Lakeville (I.M.A.) were completed.  Wes Gardner of Consultants to Management submitted a draft proposal last Fall (see attached).

 

Originally, in 1989, the charge was built on the basis of Title Five.  For a residential property, it was based on the number of bedrooms.  The cost to connect to the system – the buy-in cost – was calculated at $2.80 per gallon per day.  A three bedroom home under Title Five consumes 110 gallons per bedroom per day or 330 gallons per day time $2.80 = $924.00, plus a $75.00 application fee for a total of $999.

 

      If we had increased the charge each year to keep up with the system costs to develop new water resources over the years, we would have generated most of the money we needed to develop the new wells, new treatment systems and new main extensions needed today.  Dramatically increasing the water development charge is long overdue.  Over the years, existing customers have effectively subsidized new customers coming on line.  It is time for that subsidy, or underwriting, or undercharging of new users to end, and to establish a fair cost to buy-in to the system for all new users. 

 

      For example, one of the methods considered in the draft provide by Wes Gardner uses connection size to establish the “System Development Charge” (SDC).  The SDC for a single family house with a ⅝ inch ¾ inch service connection – the smallest connection – yields a charge (SDC) of $2,253.00 plus an application charge of $75.00, for a total of $2,328.00. 

 

      Wes Gardner will be in at 8:15 p.m. on January 22, 2007 to make a presentation and discuss the need to set an accurate SDC.  In the meantime, please review this material and get back to me with any questions you may have.

 

Selectman Andrews asked if it would be fair to say that the Water Development Charges fall on developers.

 

Mr. Healey said yes.

 

Chairman Perkins said that people have paid for the existing water system.  If users are to be added, the costs for providing and pumping go up.  This is asking for people to pay their fair share.

 

Mr. Healey noted that he has asked the Board several times to increase water rates on an annual basis, or have a progressive increase.

 

Updated Schedule of Charges

 

Mr. Healey told the Board that many of the services our Water Department personnel are called on to perform are carried out for no charge.  Most other municipal Water Departments have long since charged for these services.  Most, if not all, of these services are also development related and paid by developers or those acquiring property.

 

He said Middleborough is “behind the curve”, and should establish these charges going forward. 

 

Chairman Perkins suggested this also be brought up at the meeting on January 22nd.

 

Surplus Vehicle and Equipment Auction

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectman Andrews, the Board

            VOTED:  To declare surplus items for auction as outlined in the Town Manager’s          Report.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Mr. Healey said there will be additional items coming from the IT Department.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle asked if cruisers could be transferred to other departments.

 

Mr. Healey said he hadn’t talked to the Chief to see if they’d be useful.

 

Landfill Clay


Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To sign the Surplus Property – Landfill Clay Contract with Waste      Management, Inc. as drafted by Town Counsel.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Selectman Spataro asked if it had been widely advertised.

 

Mr. Healey said yes, noting it went through the full procurement process.

 

Housing & Community Development

 

Middleborough has received certification of its compliance with the approved Affordable Housing Plan.  During the period of one (1) year the ZBA may deny a comprehensive permit or grant a permit with conditions consistent with local needs.

 

A copy of the letter will be forwarded to the ZBA.

 

SELECTMEN’S BILLS

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To pay the bill submitted by Verizon in the amount of $25.87.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

The Board received a bill from Collins, Loughran & Peloquin, P.C. in the amount of $13,387.50.  The current balance in that line item is $2,447.50.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle suggested a Reserve Fund Transfer is necessary.

 

Mr. Healey said he didn’t believe there was a balance because of the recent issue with the heating system at the Police Station.

 

Chairman Perkins said he would speak to Attorney Peloquin.

 

Selectwoman Brunelle suggested a Special Town Meeting may be needed. 

 

The Board’s Secretary was asked to get a projected figure for the remainder of the fiscal year from Attorney Peloquin.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To pay $2,447.50 towards the bill submitted by Collins, Loughran &             Peloquin in the amount of $13,387.50.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

Upon motion by Selectman Spataro and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To pay three (3) bills submitted by the Middleborough G&E Department in the amounts of $124.75, $443.52, and $42.62, totaling $610.89.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

OTHER

 

There was no ‘Other’ Business discussed tonight.

 

 

CORRESPONDENCE

 

v     The Board discussed an email forwarded by Ruth Geoffroy in regards to the tax impact of big box retail development.

 

      Chairman Perkins asked if the Board needed to do anything.

 

      Mr. Healey said no.  He said economic studies that have been done for the Cape Cod         Commission have not been pro-development.

     

      Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the   Board

            VOTED:  Recognizing budget restraints and staffing consideration, to request that          the Planning Board consider following the same process used for Oak Point regarding consultants for the Southpointe Project.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

v     Correspondence from the Acting Town Accountant regarding a vote of the November 13, 2006 Special Town Meeting will be put in the upcoming Special Town Meeting file.

 

v     A copy of the BP Regional Technical School District Audit Report will be forwarded to the Acting Town Accountant.

 

v     Comments were received from Pat Rogers in regards to the Board’s request for residents to comment on the proposed expanded MBTA schedule.  Mr. Rogers urged the Board to notify the MBTA that an extension of train hours is “an unnecessary burden on our residents”.

 

      Selectman Andrews said there needs to be a public process to “air opinions”.

 

      Upon motion by Selectwoman Brunelle and seconded by Selectman Spataro, the    Board

            VOTED:  To schedule a public hearing for February 5, 2007.

            Unanimous Vote.

 

v     Selectman Andrews commented on the Personnel Board’s Minutes, noting he was “impressed” with the meeting with Kevin Cook and the Personnel Board, saying he believes Mr. Cook will try to adjust to the advice of the Board.

 

v     Correspondence regarding the Plymouth-Carver Aquifer was discussed.  It was the Board’s opinion that the State is trying to take control of this regional aquifer.

 

      Selectman Andrews said he would also like to revisit the Water Ban that was           established by the Board last year.     

 

      Mr. Healey suggested Selectman Andrews write out his concerns to be addressed.

 

v     Correspondence from the Department of Telecommunications & Energy will be forwarded to the Permanent Cable Committee.

 

 

Upon motion by Selectman Andrews and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board

            VOTED:  To enter into Executive Session at 10:28 PM, not to return to Open   Session, to discuss three (3) collective bargaining issues and one (1) grievance.

            A poll vote was taken.  Selectwoman Brunelle, Selectman Andrews, Selectman             Spataro, and Chairman Perkins approved.

            VOTE 4 - 0

 

 

 

 

                                                           

Diane Henault, Secretary

BOARD OF SELECTMEN