Once Free, Bulky Items, Mattresses Will Now Cost Residents To Have Them Taken Away

By Leave a Comment

Photo: This will cost you to be removed come July 1 (Credit: Jeffrey M. Vinocur, Wikimedia Commons)

It’s a claim to fame Belmont wants to shed: The Town of Homes is where residents of neighboring towns throw out their threadbare mattresses and large, oversized items at no cost due to Belmont’s tradition of complimentary sidewalk collection.

“We have become the dumping ground for surrounding communities to deposit their mattresses for free,” said Select Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne. And the ‘dump and run’ practice has reached a level beyond a nuisance, said Jay Marcotte, head of Belmont’s DPW.

In a move that Dionne hopes “will stop [Belmont] from bearing externality of other town’s large item trash,” beginning July 1, if you want a mattress, bookcase, or anything that can’t be stuffed into your trash cart, it’s gonna cost you after the Select Board unanimously approved the new fee structure.

Marcotte presented the suggested new payments for three catagories of pickups come July 1.

Change in cost to remove bulky items Prices for Pickups before July 1, 2025Prices for Pickups after July 1, 2025
Mattress/Box springFree$50
Bulk itemsfree (one per week)$40
Appliances$25 $40, $55 for televisions

Marcotte said under the new plan, residents will call the town, which will coordinate the pickup and take the payment. Residents should know that if they contact Waste Management, the town’s waste and recycling provider, to take away a mattress or box spring, it will cost double the town’s rate. The town is working with a outside vendor to recycle each mattress. Marcotte said the new fees will only generate enough revenue to cover the contrasted costs of the vendors.

Waste Management will continue to manage bulk items and appliance pickups under the new payment structure.

Marcotte said information on the updated costs for mattress and bulk item removal will be sent to residents with their next municipal bills and on the DPW’s website.

White Street ‘Ready To Go’ As Select Board OKs 14 Streets In $1.7 Million Pavement Management Plan

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Full-depth reclamation street repair on White Street begins this summer

White Street is at the top of the list of Belmont roadways to be reconstructed and repaved, as the Select Board approved a $1.7 million contract with Newport Construction Corp to undertake the 2025 Pavement Management Program.

Fourteen streets were selected in the contract, with most being “full-depth reclamation” under the PMP contract, according to Wayne Chouinard, Belmont’s Town Engineer. The low bid was approximately $200,000 higher than the estimated job cost, said Chouinard.

White Street in the Waverley neighborhood will be the first to be repaired and repaved, with work scheduled to start mid-July, said DPW Director Jay Marcotte.

“[The roadway] is already marked up and ready to go,” said Marcotte, noting the town hopes to repair White and Waterhouse Road in Winn Brook before the beginning of the school year in September, as each is close to area elementary schools.

The streets that are part of the 2025 PMP plan are:

  • Cushing Avenue
  • Sycamore Street
  • Linden Avenue
  • Shaw Road
  • Laurel Street
  • Underwood Street
  • Oliver Road
  • Marlboro Street
  • Clifton Street
  • Unity Avenue
  • Lake Street
  • Village Hill Road
  • White Street

Here Are The Streets Belmont’s DPW Will Dig Up This Summer/Fall To Replace Water Mains

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Jay Marcotte, Belmont’s DPW director

The Select Board approved a $1.2 million contract to a familiar firm as part of Belmont’s long-running water main replacement program.

Belmont Department of Public Works Director Jay Marcotte announced to the Board at its Monday, June 9 meeting that Cedrone Trucking Inc. of North Billerica was the low bidder of seven firms that sought to undertake the 2025 replacement project. While the work will begin in fiscal ’26, it will be paid with last year’s funds.

“This is [fiscal] ’25 money,” said Marcotte. “We’re a year behind.”

The streets being dug up are:

  • Barnard Road
  • Jonathan Street
  • Worcester Street
  • Drew Road
  • Benjamin Road

The work will begin in mid- to late-July. The one peice of good news for residents anticipating is that once the streets are dug up and the pipes replaced, they will be in line for repair and repaving.

“This project is working in tandem with the pavement management program” so residents will have all work done over a short period of time,” said Marcotte.

This marks the 10th time over the past 11 years that Cedrone has won the job, which Marcotte was pleased with the decision.

“They’re a great company which we have a great relationship. They know what we want they actually are fairly proactive about getting it done,” said Marcotte.

Garvin Negoitates $1 Million In Donations To Secure Solar Array For New Belmont Skating Rink

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Three donations equaling $1 million will allow a roof solar array at the new municipal skating rink

The Belmont Select Board signed three Memoranda of Understanding at its Monday, June 10, meeting to accept $1 million in donations to install a solar array on the roof of Belmont’s new municipal skating rink. The goal is to keep operating expenses at the town’s sports facility down while reducing its carbon footprint.

Under the agreements, which were negotiated and finalized by Town Administrator Patrice Garvin, the town will receive funds from:

  • Belmont Hill School: $500,000,
  • the Belmont Day School: $200,000, and
  • Belmont Light Department: $250,000

“The goal has always been to operate the rink at an operational break even, meaning revenues that we come in will be used to offset any expenses we incur,” Garvin said back in May.

“I want to thank [Garvin] for really finding a way to bring all parties together to follow through … to get solar on the building” in a collaborative way, which has been a struggle in the past, said Board Vice Chair Matt Taylor.

While the construction of the $30 million Belmont Municipal Skating Rink is “on time and on budget,” that didn’t mean the promise of a rooftop solar panels was a certainty. With the rink under the financial guns – due to the uncertainty of tariffs imposed by Donald Trump on Canadian-made equipment and the reality of unexpected costs always around the corner – the Municipal Skating Rink Building Committee in April presented the Select Board two contingency plans to provide reduced solar coverage of one-third or half based on available money.

With the prospect of rooftop solar panels seeming less than confident, Garvin took up the challenge to secure the funds. “At the previous Special Town Meeting, I stated that we would find a way to put solar on the roof of the rink,” Garvin said on the first night of Town Meeting, May 12. 

In the spring, Garvin met with each of the largest “tenants” to discuss possible one-time contributions that would secure the renewable power component.

One area that Garvin discovered was not on any of the tenants’ radar was a formal PILOT – payment in leiu of taxes – agreement. PILOT has been a hot topic among residents in the past decade in the town’s attempt to increase revenue sources, especially from non-profits. Belmont Hill School – whose extensive and expanding land holdings are exempt from property taxes – has been reluctant over the years to discuss the subject, including in its rink talks with Garvin. 

“Generally, PILOT is not a word that anyone wanted to hear,” said Garvin. Rather than push for a binding and precedent setting agreement, the Town Administrator decided to use another word in her attempt to secure one-time funding for the panels. 

“As soon as I changed the topic to ‘donations,’ they were much more receptive,” said Garvin. After some give and take on the benefits for the schools – having a new in-town rink nearby (with some advantageous scheduling to boot) – the agreements were completed in June. 

No Discount On Rent

Garvin wanted to clarify that Belmont Hills half-a-million dollar contribution is not a “pay to play” agreement.

“There’s no discount” in renting ice time for their donation, said Garvin. “They will be renting the ice from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m., three times per week. This is the current agreement [on ice time] at the prior rent agreed to many years before I was here as the Town Administrator,” said Garvin. “Belmont Hill will pay whatever that rated ice time is, which will gradually increase year over year,” she said. 

“The $500,000 donation will include a donation to the PV but also a prepayment of two seasons of ice time, meaning that we will waive the first two seasons” of the new rink. In 2027, the town and Belmont Hill will formalize a 20-year lease for ice time. 

Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne highlighted Belmont Day School’s $200,000 contribution, which “really is a true donation.” Noting the school will be using the rink for a minimum number of hours each week, “they’re asking for very, very little in return, and I’m appreciative of that,” said Dionne.

“Belmont Day is looking to have education initiatives with their students for science, technology, engineering, and math education,” said Garvin. 

Finally, the Belmont Light donation comes as the town agrees to sell any renewable energy credits (RECs) generated by the solar panels to the utility.

Garvin said the town has been planning the Belmont rink operations for some time, and getting to break even will be a three-step process, she said:

  1. Hiring a rink manager, Eric Harrington, on April 22. “He will be working with me to hire a staff to rent up ice time and to develop policies and procedures to run the ring,” said Garvin.
  2. Maximizing the rink’s revenue by locking in rents at market rates.
  3. Control operating costs. Solar is seen as key to minimizing the cost for the rink’s operation. And that component is best achieved by

“We need to work with the Recreation Commission to determine what the fees for that ice time will be,” said Garvin. “We plan to retain and secure long-term tenants that have used the rink for years and to maximize any utilization we can find to operate the rink.”

The complete solar array provides several benefits to the town’s bottom line and its residents:

  1. It makes good on a commitment to the residents to using renewable energy when the debt exclusion was passed in 2024 and to the Town Meeting Members when they were asked for additional funding to put solar panels on the rink’s roof.
  2. It reduces operating expenses by $7,000, an estimate calculated using Belmont Middle and High School solar generation as a matrix. “We’re also expecting increases in electricity for calendar year 2026, 2027 and 2028,” said Garvin.
  3. “We are challenged to find revenue to support the ring’s operations. So a path forward is the solar if we even want to attempt to break even on operations, and especially as costs increase year over year,” said Garvin. 

Special Town Meeting: Confusion Sinks Senior Center Citizens’ Petition

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Bob McGaw (left) speaking on the Citizens’ Petition at the Special Town Meeting

A citizens’ petition that would upend the transition of Recreation Department staffers into the Beech Street Center collapsed as Special Town Meeting voted on Wednesday, May 21, to table the Special Town Meeting article after members said the language of the article was “confusing” about what it was proposing to do.

“This is seemingly a simple motion. But, in fact, it’s rather confusing,” said Jack Weis (Precinct 1). “We are being asked to vote for something that is apparently not fully baked, and we haven’t even been given detailed information on what we’re being asked to approve.”

During the Special Town Meeting held on the final night of the annual Town Meeting season, the citizens’ petition—STM Article 3: “To Protect the Beech Street Center”—presented by petitioners Robert McGaw and Paul Joy was the most discussed article this spring. Senior Center supporters raised concerns about a proposal from the town to relocate three recreation personnel and the town’s Veterans Agent from the Homer Building to the Beech Street Center.

Supporters of the status quo believe the transfer violated a 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between the town and the Friends of Belmont Council on Aging in which the primary operation of the Center would be senior-based until 2049 unless Town Meeting by a two-thirds vote authorized a change of use. 

While it received approximately 300 resident signatures, the petition had an uphill battle in its attempt to undo the movement of personnel. The town presented a legal opinion by the Boston law firm Anderson & Kreiger saying that adding three staffers within the administrative offices did not constitute a change of use of the mission of the Senior Center and thus did not trigger the requirement of a two-thirds vote by Town Meeting, said Town Moderator Mike Crowley. 

Even if it came before members, a “yes” vote on the citizens’ petition article would be a “non-binding resolution that expresses an opinion about the [town’s] plan,” according to the Town Council. The town noted that the legal opinion was authored by the same person, Town Council George Hall, who wrote the MOU 15 years before.

Finally, the petition’s wording didn’t assist the petitioner’s case. Claiming the MOU did not specify how to stop changes to the Senior Center, the supporters were asking members to defeat the town’s proposal by voting “no” rather than writing the article where it would seek a “yes” vote.

The debate

Crowley placed a tight hold on the debate by establishing rules, including “experimenting” with a 40-minute limit (with a 20-minute extension if needed) on questions and comments. While saying members can certainly talk about proposed changes and advisability, Crowley said the meeting would not debate the legality of the 2011 memorandum nor question the management structure of the Beech Street Center or how senior services are managed, as all would be deemed out of scope.

Joy (Precinct 7) kicked off the debate by proclaiming Belmont to be more than “just a place. It’s a promise of community, trust, and care for every generation.” He evoked the work of former town meeting member Barbara Miranda, who was a leader in constructing the Senior Center, and how her legacy isn’t just history—”it’s a living promise. The 2011 memorandum is not just legal jargon. It’s Belmont’s word to the people who poured their lives into this town.”

Reiterating the article’s main argument, Joy said the MOU’s requirement that Town Meeting approve a change of use by a 2/3 vote is “not a suggestion, it’s a contract, it’s someone’s word binding us to those that came before and those still to come.” 

“Is it not unreasonable to conclude that these plans come with significant long-term implications,” Joy warned. “We must ask how these changes will affect the seniors’ identity as a senior center over time, especially if recreation expands.”

“So I ask you tonight, from the bottom of my heart, will you stand with them? Will you vote ‘no’ on Article 4 and tell the world that Belmont is a town that listens, that it keeps its word, that it believes in its people.”

McGaw (Precinct 2) pointed to the April 23rd COA meeting, which alarmed seniors and saw them sign the petition “to seek to protect the Senior Center, to keep the town focused on senior needs, to maintain the ability of the Senior Center to provide additional programming, to serve an increasing senior population, which is now over 25 percent of Belmont.” 

“Our position is simply this: if the town wants to convert portions of the Senior Center to other uses, it should follow the process outlined in the 2011 memorandum,” and obtain a 2/3 approval from the Town Meeting, said McGaw.

Select Board Vice Chair Matt Taylor—also the board’s liaison to the Council on Aging—defended the move, saying the Rec Department personnel “time and again” assist in tasks for a short-staffed COA to sustain COA services for seniors. This is a team effort.” 

“What the petitioners saw in April was us collaborating and consulting with the COA” without any demands by the town to create a separate space for the Rec Department staff,” said Taylor. “All of this was to support seniors in programming,” he said.

Taylor also reiterated the board’s support for a trial run of the staffers at the Center, which will monitor, gather data, and ” be responsive to any issues that may arise affecting Senior Services.”

“No one at any time is suggesting or trying to change the primary purpose of the Beech Street Center,” Taylor said. 

After Maryann Scali (Precinct 2) helped define what “junior” seniors and “senior” seniors as she advocated for a no-vote, the first whiff of trouble for the petitioners came from the third speaker, Mary Lewis (Precinct 1), who said she found “this motion … deeply confusing.” Lewis said the article required a no vote to support preventing the proposed alterations, conversion, and use of space at the Center by the Recreation Department staff. But at recent presentations, the town has said it will not be building out areas of the Senior Center, such as creating a new door to accommodate the recreation-related business.

“So if we vote yes, we are affirming something untrue. If we vote no, we are agreeing with something that we might disagree with,” Lewis said, summing up the dilemma facing members.  

“This is fundamentally a decision around the utilization of office space by town departments, and I would submit that a body of 288 people who have been given scant information about this is not the right body and not the right time for us to make a decision about that,” said Weis who said he would be voting “abstain.”

Angus Abercrombie (Precinct 8) was the first of three members who questioned whether the best use of the Beech Street Center would be accomplished by placing restrictions on having recreation personnel in the building. Taylor said that the town has “robbed the Recreation [Department] of staff and attention in order to sustain the services at the COA.” Having the recreation staff in the office space will allow 

Judith Feinleib (Precinct 6), who authored a lengthy online defense of voting no, said the debate isn’t about “all the great things” at the Beech Street Center but rather “whether the nature of the agreement between the town and its citizens, especially seniors, is being changed.” Since she believed it would be, Feinleib said voting no is the only option. 

After Ade Bapista (Precinct 3) attempted to call the question early on —it failed by a wide margin—Ann Marie Mahoney (Precinct 1) went before the microphone to outline the history of the choices and decisions made regarding creating the Beech Street Center.

Mahoney said her message was that “we make choices and that things change,” noting that Chenery Middle School was designed and built for grades five through eight but now houses grades four, five, and six, which have very different requirements. “The Chenery is still a school regardless of which grades are housed, and we’ve adjusted and created a wonderful environment.” 

“I view this reorganization of our department heads and staff as an opportunity. It’s an opportunity for senior programming, not an intrusion or incursion. With careful planning, the primacy of the senior citizens can be respected and promoted at the Beach Street Center, and the vibrancy of recreation opportunities can be added.”

“We make changes. We are one town. We should make changes for the positive. If I can close with my favorite person, Winston Churchill, “To improve is to change. To be perfect is to change often.”

Jean Widmer (Precinct 5) said that as the former School Committee chair, teacher, and educator, she had repeatedly contacted seniors to ask for their support of many Prop 2 1/2 overrides and debt exclusions for the town and schools. “Without the support of those seniors, the overrides would never have passed,” she said, and Town Meeting members should repay that debt by keeping the Center for seniors.

Christine Doyle, (Precinct 6) who is also the chair of the Comprehensive Capital Budget Committee, said no matter where citizens stood on the 2023 override vote, “both sides begged to the town staff and Select Board to look for ways to increase revenues and reduce expenses.”

“In my mind, this potential proposal improves services for constituents and residents, it improves services for employees … and improves space optimization” in several town buildings, said Doyle.

Glenn Wong (Precinct 7) came on Zoom to make a motion to dismiss. His reason for the postponement was the general confusion of the main motion, where a yes vote “did not reflect my understanding of the situation and voting no didn’t [reflect his] understanding from the debate.”

Several members attempted to use the debate to continue advocating, only to have calls of “point of order!” as the body had heard enough. After one hour and 40 minutes, the citizens’ petition was dismissed, 172-68-4.

And the rest of the night

A Special Town Meeting overwhelmingly passed a long-promised Senior and Veterans Tax Relief (STM Article 2), 227-3-1. However, members were far from happy with the details, feeling the amount of relief and the number of elder residents being helped were insufficient compared to the levels of support in cities such as Somerville and Cambridge.

Chair of the Senior Relief Task Force Geoff Lubien admitted to the body that the article was not the easiest to explain, but he got through it. The package is made up of several provisions: 

  • Adopting a state law providing an additional real estate exemption for taxpayers,
  • Adjust the veteran’s exemption to the state’s inflation rate,
  • Adopting a second state law allowing residents to pay less in taxes if their exemption is greater than the previous year, 
  • Provide a statutory exemption for low-income seniors with limited assets of $40,000,
  • Reduce the minimum eligibility age from 70 to 65.

Only 21 homeowners are currently taking advantage of the town’s existing program, but Lubein said that number is “the foundation of the future program.” 

Liz Allison (Precinct 3) asked how much the new program would cost the town and where it would be made up. Lubien said the immediate impact could be up to $50,000 in maximum benefits. The Select Board’s Matt Taylor said the Board of Assessors Overlay account – a state-required withholding to cover abatements and exemptions – will pay for the expense. Jack Weis (Precinct 2) said the amount in relief would have an “inconsequential marginal impact” on the town’s $150 million operational budget, so as “a matter of fairness,” it should pass. 

Town Administrator Patrice Garvin presented STM Article 4 on using $600,000 released from the Board of Assessors Overlay account for three one-time funding needs:

  • $100,000 to the Conservation Commission towards work required to establish a conservation restriction for Rock Meadow,
  • $275,000 to the Capital Stabilization Fund, and 
  • $225,000 to begin a playing field maintenance program.

Speaking on the first motion, Conservation Commission Chair Chris Morris said the funds will go towards resource mapping, title research, and creating a master plan for the popular conservation area—which includes the town’s Victory Garden—which will result in the land being placed under a conservation restriction, a legal agreement designed to permanently protect the conservation values of a property by defining allowed uses.

“This is step one … of all the work that will require us to be good stewards of this property and to actively maintain it appropriately,” said Morris.

Anyone who has walked or played on the town’s 23 acres of parks and playing fields will know “deteriorating conditions are becoming more evident to users each day,” said Town Administrator Patrice Garvin. The reduction of DPW staff, budget constraints, the continuous activity by youth athletics teams, and the damage from unrestricted dog use have resulted in the town “triaging our fields rather than maintaining them with a formal plan,” she said.

With an infusion of $225,000, the town proposes “ramping up maintenance by outsourcing professional expertise” to help the fields recover from years of deferred upkeep and “allow for a better understanding of usage patterns and long-term sustainability,” said Garvin.

“This is not a short-term fix. It’s the beginning of a smarter, more sustainable building management strategy that addresses past conduct and sets up the future,” she said.

Ira Morganstern (Precinct 7) asked if this plan is the best use of town funds, saying it’s not clear what the true cost of this long-term program will be.

Yes,” answered Garvin. “We have to start somewhere.”

Taken together, the three measures were approved 208-4-2. 

Back to the Town Meeting for a final article, the Community Preservation Committee approved $472,338 to revitalize the West of Harris Field softball field and effectively complete the Middle and High School campus. The restored JV softball diamond and grass soccer and field hockey pitch have been discussed for years by the School Committee that controls the field. Work will begin this fall, just as the rink construction is completed, with an opening date of Spring 2026.

Peg Callahan (Precinct 7) reiterated a point made by several members that the only reason the town is picking up the nearly half-million dollar tab for the renovation is that the Middle and High School Building Committee “completely abandoned” the $3 million reconstruction of the fields it had promised to complete as part of the original 2018 plan approved in a $213 million debt exclusion approved by voters.

“Fitzie” Cowing (Precinct 8), who is a strong proponent of youth sports, proclaimed, “I’m really sorry softball” when she said she’d be voting no as she believed that the funding “is an expenditure of community funds without a community process.” Had there been a public engagement on WoHF, citizens would have shown a lack of support, as the town can not maintain the current fields. Rather, the town should invest in “turf” or synthetic fields to take the burden off grass fields.

Chris Doyle said that under current state restrictions, a turf field can not seek Conservation Preservation Commission funding. Thus, any synthetic surface pitch, which would cost nearly $2 million to install, must be in the CCBC’s inventory, which is backlogged with a slew of projects, including replacing the Harris Field turf in two years at $1.9 million. 

Instead, Doyle advised the Town Meeting to “grab the money and run” from the CPC, but continue the dialogue to obtain the needed turf pitch.

The WoHF measure passed 167-19-5, and with the clock reading 11:23 p.m., the Town Meeting came to a quiet end. It will be back for the fall Special in October.

Breaking: Select Board Agree On Aspects Of COA Memo On Senior Center’s Future;

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Karen Donelan, Chair of the Council on Aging

The Belmont Select Board moved to support the leading aspects of a memorandum authored by Karen Donelan, Chair of the Council on Aging, on the future of the Beech Street Center, the town’s senior center. The memo will transition three recreation department staff members into the Beech Street Center on a “trial” basis beginning this summer. 

“So, let’s give it a try,” said Donelan, who reported that the COA had approved the memo unanimously earlier in the afternoon. 

This spring, the proposed staff move has been a highly controversial issue, resulting in heated meetings and a citizens’ petition. It is unknown how this partial agreement will affect the citizen’s petition, which will be the first article at the Special Town Meeting on Wednesday, May 21. 

At the Select Board meeting held before the fourth night of the 2025 Town Meeting, Donelan said the “rules of moving forward” regarding the town’s effort to move the recreation employees are that the town will maintain “senior” hours—currently 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. (with one day a 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. shift)—at the Beech Street Center and maintain a senior-based parking scheme. 

In return, the town and COA agree to evaluate the move to determine its impact on the senior services and elder patrons. The Select Board also agrees to abandon the plan to build a separate entry for recreational operations.

“This gives everyone a breather,” said Matt Taylor, the board’s vice chair and COA representative.

[This is an ongoing article and will be undated.]

Town Meeting Day Three: Clean Sweep For CPC Proposals

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Chair Aaron Pikcilingis, Community Preservation Committee  

It was CPC Night on the third session of Belmont’s annual Town Meeting as six of the eight applications from the Community Preservation Committee were overwhelmingly approved by the members at the meeting held Monday, May 12, at the Belmont High School auditorium. One proposal was removed for future consideration, and another will be voted on at the Special Town Meeting on May 21.

“The main thing we do is review applications for funding of the Community Preservation Act,” said the committee’s new Chair, Aaron Pikcilingis. 

He pointed out that this year “is a little unusual, due mainly to a change in our policy about how much money – about $5 million – we hold in reserve. There is more money available this year … In future years, we’ll return to having about a year’s revenue available.”

Pikcilingis said CPA funding has reached $20.5 million since voters passed the measure in 2011 – $15.5 million from the real estate surcharge and $4.5 million in state contribution—with the CPC sending $4.9 million in projects this year to the Town Meeting. 

The list of Community Preservation Committee projects (italics indicates project not receiving a vote; Bold indicatesa vote on Wednesday, May 21)

Amount10 percent Reserve Project NameCategory
$ 2,000,000$ 200,000Chenery Park Renovation – Phase 2Open Space/ Recreation
$ 100,000Clay Pit Pond Walking Path – Full Design with Construction Document and DrawingsOpen Space/ Recreation
$ 429,433$ 42,900West of Harris Softball FieldOpen Space/ Recreation
$ 650,000Predevelopment Planning for Redevelopment of Belmont VillageCommunity Housing
$ 60,000Complete Restoration of “Burial Hill” Original Cemetery – DesignHistoric Preservation
$ 550,396$ 55,000Homer Building Restoration (Town Hall Annex)Historic Preservation
$ 750,000$ 75,000Restore Failed Retaining Wall, Town HallHistoric Preservation

The night began with a visit from State Rep. Dave Rogers who discussed the upcoming Fiscal ’26 state budget – thatincludes critical local aid to municipalities – and how it will be affected by “a high level of uncertainties” coming from the Trump administration and slower than expected state growth. “Things were level funded that might have otherwise gottenincreased,” said Rogers.

That being said, Rogers said his year’s House Budget has increased Chapter 70 funding for K-12 received a 5.6 percent increase via the new “millionaires” surtax passed by voters last year. He also highlighted his efforts to increase funding for immigrant legal defense to hire attorneys to represent those in deportation proceedings, including “some whose due process rights may not be being observed.”

Rogers said he tries to find a few bucks in the budget to direct to the town. “While I can’t get a ton of money, I fight for earmarks for Belmont,” Rogers said. These include:

  • $75,000 for renovations – adding a fifth court – to the Winn Brook tennis courts.
  • $75,000 to expand the town’s tree canopy.

There were also two earmarks from the state’s supplement budget – that’s the millionaire’s surtax – including:

  • $75,000 for sidewalk safety improvements.
  • $100,000 towards the Chenery Park revitalization.

Warrant Committee Chair Paul Rickter gave a standard overview of the fiscal ’26 budget, including how the $166.2 million budget is segmented (education receives 43 percent or $70.9 million) and some historical context, such as the fact that exempted debt has increased by 247 percent in the past 12 years, from $4.8 million to $16.6 million. 

But what Rickter stressed in his report was the importance of the “revenue-first balanced budget” process, first used by town and school budget writers for the fiscal ’25 budget, a development he and the committee were “overjoyed” to see being used as it created a disciplined approach to the process.

“Keep doing it,” advised Rickter. 

The projects

The CPC approved and sent to the Town Meeting a request for $650,000 allocated to Belmont Village, one of Belmont’s three public housing projects. The funds will go to complete the conceptual design for the revitalization of the nearly 70-year-old development, with the opportunity to double the number of units to 200 apartments on the 6.6-acre site. In 2020, the Town Meeting approved $173,000 in an initial request. 

With the funding, site planning work will kick off in the summer with a study draft by the end of the year. An additional $1.2 million will then be needed for final architectural and engineering plans, consultants’ fees, and extra costs to finish the pre-development phase.

Gloria Leipzig, chair of the Belmont Housing Trust, which sponsored the measure, told the members that their support for the redevelopment efforts at Belmont Village and Sherman Gardens “will provide housing for our residents, seniors, those with disabilities, and families. And very importantly, we’ll also create additional and much-needed affordable housing here in Belmont.” 

Matt Zajac of the Cambridge Housing Authority—which has partnered with Belmont as a co-developer of the Belmont Housing Authority’s sites since 2021 —said that after the study is completed, the BHA/CHA can begin to leverage state and federal financing sources. He said that it will take three, five, or ten years before construction will take place.

During the questions, members asked about spending funds on a project in which millions of dollars in funding will be required to upgrade units and construct new structures that have not been secured. “Is there any visibility for funding sources to carry out these plans? Otherwise, this is income transfer to white-collar professionals, not improvements in the affordable housing conditions,” asked Liz Allison (Precinct 3). Zajac replied that the most likely potential funding source will be the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.

Some members were disappointed that the CPC wasn’t banking the funding remaining in this year’s housing “bucket” for future housing requests. Angus Abercrombie, Precinct 8, said he would vote against the other CPC measures—despite being in favor of their approval—as a symbolic protest against the town’s inaction. 

The measure passed 222-6-3.

Laura Burnes and Nicole O’Connell, Friends of Chenery Park

The biggest ticket item before members Monday was $2 million—$200,000 from the CPA and $1.8 million from the undesignated fund balance—to renovate the dilapidated Chenery Upper Middle School grounds and play area. This request came on top of a $1 million CPC request approved by the Town Meeting last year for construction costs and $300,000 for the project’s design and engineering.

Laura Burnes and Nicole O’Connell, the co-chairs of the Friends of Chenery Park, said the groundwork for this application to redo the nearly quarter-century-old field and playground with outreach to the community, sports leagues, and the town to develop an overview of the project. When the first chunk of funding was received in 2024, the Friends began holding community engagement events to collect data and comments on what the public wanted to see in the project.

On Monday, the Friends presented a final design dubbed the Play Sandwich, in which sports programming is the “bread” and the play area is the “middle” filling. “We’ve got lots of multi-sports use … tennis as well as street hockey and soccer and basketball, but the space can also accommodate volleyball and badminton,” said O’Connell. The main field holds two renovated softball diamonds. 

While the request totals a whopping $3.3 million, the project had broad support. Many members said visiting the site would convince those initially skeptical to support the measure. Just as crucial to its passage was Burnes and O’Connell’s well-planned public participation blueprint, which allowed the wider community to enthusiastically buy in on the project. Future large projects would be wise to use the Friends playbook as a template for a successful campaign.

The Chenery playground renovation – which begins this summer – passed 222-5-1.

Facilities Director Dave Blazon says the Homer Building restoration will allocate $550,396 to repair and replace deteriorating architectural elements. The bill passed 222-7-6.

Restoring the failed Town Hall retaining wall so the ramp and stairs on the Concord Avenue entrance don’t collapse, said Blazon. Members, by a 231-6-4 margin, thought spending $850,000 for the job was a good thing.

The commissioning of a design to completely restore the “Burial Hill” area of Belmont Cemetery got out of the CPC by a single vote, 4-3-1, which usually spells trouble for a measure. However, the request was initiated by resident Ron Sacco, who told DPW Director Jay Marcotte this past August of his difficulty finding an ancestor’s grave in the northeast corner of Belmont Cemetery, which holds its oldest internments. Upon inspection, the steep incline was overgrown and deteriorating, making identifying the exact locations of graves impossible. 

When Sacco asked the DPW if it could “start digging,” Marcotte said he had a better plan and approached a consultant. A design plan focusing on headstone repairs and restoration, searching for missing headstones, erosion control, and vegetation options would cost $60,000. This would be followed by a CPC request in 2026 for the still-to-be-determined cost of the construction.

What closed the deal was that Sacco’s relative is buried among veterans. When a member didn’t believe the request was “a wise use of funds because somebody can’t find this relative” as it would “[set] a precedent which is not good,” Ann Marie Mahoney (Precinct 1) rose to say “as the daughter, spouse and mother of veterans, we owe these people no matter how many hundreds of years ago they were down for we owe them the restoration and the appropriate care.”

“It’s also for the respect for everyone that made a commitment and the expectation that they will be taken care of basicallyforever. And it’s just respect for the dead and to care for those that entrusted us to take care of the burial site forever,” said Mahoney.

The measure passed 218-10-8.

The issue with the Clay Pit Pond Walking Path is that while nearly 2/3 of the trail has been completed, the remaining path clashes with an established asphalt lane bordering Belmont Middle and High School. The town didn’t believe the Town Meeting would approve the Conservation Commission’s request to seek a parallel footpath. For allowing the town to remove the request, the town is proposing to an request seeking a parallel footpath. For allowing the town to remove the request, the town is proposing to allocate an equivilant amount towards improvements at Rock Meadow Conservation Land.

Glenn Clancy, Belmont’s Long-Serving Town Engineer, Has Died [Update]

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Glenn Clancy

Glenn Clancy, who spent nearly five decades serving the residents of Belmont, died on Wednesday, May 14, 2025.

Clancy, 61, died after a long-battle with cancer, according to his family.

On leave since late last year, the Quincy-native would have celebrated his 40th anniversary working in Belmont this June.

“Glenn was a dedicated public servant, whose career in Belmont spanned four decades and many roles, including long-time Director of the Office of Community Development and Town Engineer,” wrote Select Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne in an email to Town Meeting members.

“Glenn was a consummate professional. His work was meticulous and always reliable. He was a true gentleman, treating everyone—from town leaders to his professional colleagues to the most obstreperous members of the public—with unfailing courtesy and respect, not to mention a ready smile and flashes of wry humor. His passing leaves a tremendous hole in all our hearts,” Dionne noted.

Clancy’s presence was missed at this year’s Town Meeting, as he was a familiar presenter of town-sponsored articles. With a wry smile and “Ah shucks” demeanor, Clancy would expertly maneuver some of the most contentious issues before the meeting with a thorough understanding of the subject and facts.

For decades as Town Engineer, Clancy was the town official who managed the town’s notorious roads and sidewalks. But he took the job understanding resident’s complaints, but also seeing it as an opportunity to “gently” educate citizens on why their streets were on a waiting list for repair. One year at a community get-together, Clancy sat a table with a handwritten sign proclaiming: “Ask me about the roads,” and answered a night’s worth of queries.

The Flag of the United States of America at Town Hall was lowered to half-staff on Wednesday to honor Clancy. On what is expected to be the fourth night of the annual Town Meeting, Monday, May 19, Town Moderator Michael Crowley will lead the Meeting in a moment of silence to remember Clancy and mark his passing.

Clancy is survived by his wife Kathryn Condos Clancy of Quincy, his son, Aaron Clancy of Quincy, and his daughter, Sarah Clancy of Dallas, TX. He also leaves his brother Steven Clancy, and his wife Paula of Oak Ridge, TN, and sister, Lynn Liscio of Nashua, NH.

Visiting hours is on Sunday May 18, 2025 from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. in the Keohane Funeral Home, 785 Hancock St., QUINCY. A Celebration of Life Service will be held in the funeral home at 9 a.m. on Monday May 19 prior to the Funeral Mass in St. John’s Church, Quincy at 10 a.m. Burial will be at Pine Hill Cemetery, Quincy. 

According to Dionne, working in conjunction with his family, Town leadership hopes to recognize Clancy at the Special Town Meeting in October.

First Week ’25 Town Meeting: New Moderator Passes Day One Test; No ‘Nos’ On Second Day

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Moderator Mike Crowley leads 2025 Town Meeting on first night of annual gathering

It’s a notice that no one had on their Town Meeting BINGO© card.

“We’re having technical difficulties. Town Meeting will resume shortly.” 

That menacing message flashed on the big screen at the Belmont High School auditorium minutes after the start of the 2025 annual Town Meeting on Monday, May 5. Zoom dropped off, the sound system shut down to be replaced by an echo as electronic and internet gremlins played havoc with the town’s ambitious attempt at a hybrid meeting.

It was an inauspicious beginning for the first night of the annual gathering and for Mike Crowley‘s start as the Town’s Moderator. But Belmont Media’s Jeff Hansel and the town’s IT crowd chased the electronic elves off, and Crowley was finally able to have a successful—with a few hiccups, but nothing to remember—first night in charge of the Belmont Town Meeting.

“[The delay] was a good thing for me,” said Crowley on Wednesday. “I was able to relax at the podium for those extra minutes, and it helped,” he said. He added that he appreciated having the Town Clerk’s staff and a slew of experienced town employees and elected officials to help guide the way.

Before the night’s business got underway, the Select Board presented a proclamation to the former moderator, Mike Widmer, for his 40 years of “extraordinary” public service including 17 years as moderator, a town meeting member and his contributions to state – a quarter century leading the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation – and local finance. Widmer told the meeting that while he was proud of what he accomplished, “but nothing good in life really gets done alone,” acknowledging the cooperation of town employees and committee members.

“I love democracy,” he said, returning to a favorite theme as moderator. Noting that 288 residents ran for Town Meeting, and come out to the annual gathering “is a marvelous thing for this town and this country that were built on this democratic experiment. So don’t take it lightly the fact that some of this become routine. And don’t take lightly the privilege of stepping to the microphone and being able to say what you feel without the fear of recrimination,” said Widmer, to a standing ovation.

State of the Town: alot good, some not so

Elizabeth Dionne, Select Board chair, gave an unofficial ‘State of the Town’ address, with the familiar phrase as title: “The Best of Times, The Worst of Times.” On the best side of the ledger, “honest, competent local government” that allowed the town and schools to work collaboratively to produce a balanced budget that, for the first time, saw agreed-on spending limits. On the worst side, clouds loom over the fiscal year 2027 budget process, which will be a “more difficult” exercise. 

Dionne highlighted Belmont’s commitment to meeting the recommendations of the 2022 Collins Center report, which pointed out the town’s financial challenges: hiring Jennifer Hewitt to the town’s newly created Financial Director’s post, an appointed treasurer, and a board of assessors, and starting a multi-year Budget Advisory Committee. 

Dionne also praised the ramping up of the Information Technology Department under Chief Innovation Officer Chris McClure, a refocus on Planning and Economic Development to attract commercial and industrial activity, and the reorganization of the Community Services Department.

But while town continues to do more with less, “we have hit the outer limits of efficiencies on the municipal side,” as Belmont ratepayers are weighed down by “one of the state’s heaviest property tax burdens,” she said.

“Persuading voters to add to their already heavy tax burden will be an uphill battle, which means that we must demonstrate ongoing fiscal discipline before asking voters for another override,” said Dionne.

First Night: 800 Apples heading to the schools

Monday’s first night of Town Meeting saw Crowley complete more than half of the 20 articles in the warrant, many profunctory, such as elected officials’ salaries. Tomi Olsen (Precinct 6) did suggest Town Clerk Ellen Cushman receive a raise citing the office’s workload and professionalism.

Town Meeting approved two new revolving funds: for the new skating rink and solid waste management. Select Board Vice Chair Matt Taylor explained that the funds raised through fees would endure, and the money is used for specific activities; solid waste management would include mattress removal. Vince Stanton (Precinct 2) asked if the money in a revolving fund could be invested in, for example, money market securities to reap the benefit of increasing rates. Taylor responded, saying those funds work by taking in revenue and distributing it when needed over the year. Also, there are lots of governmental restrictions when investing town funds. (222-18-2)

The meeting approved the School Committee’s four-year lease-to-own financing contract with Apple for 800 iPads for Belmont’s youngest students, replacing the current inventory that is coming to the end of its useful life. The contract came before Town Meeting as it had exceeded the state’s three-year limit for such agreements. The members responded positively – actual cheers – when it was revealed that the funds came from the school’s budget rather than another source, such as free cash. (231-3-0)

Finally, Town Meeting approved an article asking the state legislature to pass home rule legislation that will allow the town to ban second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides, better known as rat poison. Rodents partake of the toxic bait but, unfortunately, pass it on to the rat’s predators—like hawks, owls, and eagles—which kill them. The article passed 222-5-2.

Night Two: Roads? Yes, yes, yes, etc, etc

In a report to the Town Meeting, Library Building Committee Kathy Keohane told members that while the $39.5 million new library project is on budget with enough contingency funds to offset any foreseeable cost hikes, the project’s timeline for substantial completion has been pushed back a week to November 1. 

“That puts us moving into the building in November and December, with the hope that we’ll have some targeted services open in the library in December with a brand new opening in January,” said Keohane. “We don’t want to compete with the holidays, so we’re going to wait for the quiet month of January and celebrate the heck out of that month.”

The articles 

If you saw the final tallies on Wednesday night’s articles, you’d probably think you saw the results of some authoritarian dictatorship. For seven of the eight times it voted on either an article or appropriations, not a single Town Meeting Member cast a ‘no’ vote. In fact, one member voted against allowing Assistant Town Clerk Meg Piccioneto to substitute for Town Clerk Ellen Cushman, who couldn’t attend Wednesday. Go figure.

Want a surefire way to start a conversation in Belmont? Bring up roads and sidewalks. That’s what happened on Wednesday night as a line of members formed before the two microphones on the auditorium floor and on Zoom when the total appropriation of $2.513 million—$2 million for streets and $512,266 for sidewalks—was brought before the meeting. While the article was to appropriate funds, many members took the opportunity to express, once again, their frustrations with Belmont’s infamous roadways and sidewalks. 

After being told by National Grid that two small gas leaks on her street had to be repaired before 2027 but the town scheduled road repairs in fiscal ’24, Corinne McCue Olmsted (Precinct 1) wondered if there was any coordination with the gas utility and the town so streets would not be dug up after the repair, Assistant Town Engineer Wayne Chouinard said while there is communication between the parties, sometimes the utility will miss a scheduled monthly meeting or something will fall through the cracks to create issues with ripping up the road. 

“National Grid is the bane of my existence,” said DPW Director Jay Marcotte. While the town has a five-year moratorium on any work after a repair, it does not apply to the utility. “We can work with them with the best intentions to figure out how they can get in and do their gas work to repair leaks, they may not get around to it. It’s extremely frustrating on our end.”

Rosemary Burke (Precinct 2) told the meeting that $2.5 million is “nowhere near what this town needs to spend on roads and sidewalks.” She contends that “all the roads are a mess … and there isn’t anyone that lives anywhere here that doesn’t have a terrible street.” 

“What kind of plan will the town come up with … to more substantially address the town’s serious infrastructure problem?” Burke asked. Marcotte said his department works with consultants who rate the town’s roadways and prioritize those streets that fall below a set standard, basically selecting the worst of the lot. 

Here’s a first for the Town Meeting: Emily Peterson called the question via Zoom. The appropriation passed 218-1-1

The answer: 157. Question: How many trees did the DPW plant in the past fiscal year? And that was nearly twice the average (80) of replacement trees placed throughout town, mainly on the green strips next to sidewalks, according to Marcotte. Town Meeting approved the Comprehensive Capital Budget Committee’s request of $35,000 for tree planting in FY ’25.

Article 3: Updating the 2004 Belmont Floodplan District zoning bylaw by modifying existing sections to meet new federal requirements and incorporating new definitions and use regulations. (233-0-0)

Article 12: Approve $3.1 million in funding for the water main replacement program. Now four decades on, the program has replaced 35.5 miles of the 39 miles of unlined steel water mains laid before 1929. Best part, a loan from the MWRA to do the work is interest free. (242-0-0).

Article 18: The quarter-century-old roof of the Chenery Upper Elementary School needs to be replaced. The first part of the three-year plan is installing new HVAC systems for $3.7 million. Possible rebates, grants for updated heating and cooling equipment, and any remaining funds from this year’s work will go towards the $4.2 million to replace the roof in fiscal ’27. (207-0-1)

Article 17: Capital Expenditures, totaling $668,000, included:

  • Council on Aging: An accessible van at $75,000. (216-0-0)
  • DPW: Tree planting and purchasing a dump truck for $135,000. (239-0-1)
  • Fire Department: $118,000 towards a $545,000 new ambulance, $90,000 for breathing apparatus (239-0-1)
  • $250,000 in Information Technology infrastructure upgrades and cables (213-0-0) 

Town Meet will reconvene at 7 p.m., Monday, May 12 at the Belmont High School auditorium.

COA Votes To Delay Transitioning Rec Dept Staff To Beech Street Center; Town, Select Board Has Other Ideas

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The Council on Aging voted 9-1 to delay the transition of three Recreation Department staffers and the Veterans Agent into the Beech Street Center

At first glance, the proposal from town officials to transistion the Recreation Department to the Beech Street Senior Center this fall appears straightforward enough. Due to space needs at Town Hall with the Retirement Board heading to the Homer Building, construction work – including adding a new entry specifically for Recreation Department use – will be performed so three Recreation Department administrative staffers and the town’s Veterans Agent can relocate into a corner of the Beech Street Center as town librarians – in the location temporarily as the new library is being built – are prepared to transfer out. 

While the request didn’t appear to be contentious, don’t tell that to seniors who contend the transition is part of a “power play” by the town to reduce or remove the Council on Aging’s control of the Beech Street Center. Many senior advocates point to last year’s placement of the once-independent Senior Center into the newly-created Community Services Department – which occurred only after a protracted debate – as another example of the town interjecting its will onto its seniors.

“A lot of us see this building as just being prime real estate, and the town is licking its chops and figuring out every scheme it can use to move inside,” said Bob McGaw. The chair of the By-Law Review Committee has spearheaded a successful Citizens Petition with more than 300 signatures to bring an article to the Special Town Meeting inside the annual Town Meeting on May 21 to ask the town’s legislative to approve the Center’s “change of use essentially.” 

COA member Maryann Scali

After a month of meetings in April, the COA on Wednesday, April 30, voted 9-1 to delay the proposed transition of the Rec Department employees in the Center until the completion of the ongoing University of Massachusetts Boston community needs assessment survey of town’s seniors, and the formation of a working advisory group made up of COA members, residents, and others would then meet to hammer out a new plan. 

“We don’t have enough detail [about the transition plan],” said COA member Andrea Paschal just before Wednesday’s vote. “The thought of having the Rec Department, library, and senior services here all the way through ’til November seems almost impossible to me. So I think if I had to decide today … let’s wait at least until the fall when the library has moved out and when we have more information about the details and then come to a decision about the best way to combine rec, veterans, and senior services.” 

Yet, according to two COA members, the vote—and the hopes of senior activists—was insubstantial at Wednesday’s meeting, as the final determination on the transition lies in the hands of the town’s administrative body.

“We do have our hands tied, because ultimately, we advise the Select Board, [but] the Select Board is the body which ultimately makes these decisions,” said COA Chair Karen Donelan.

At the COA public meetings, opinions sharpened as the assembled voiced its approval of speakers who blasted the proposed transfer and vowed to halt the move. Supporters contend that inserting the Rec. Department employees violates the long-standing agreement between the town and financial donors who brought in approximately $1 million that the primary use of the building would be senior-oriented. 

For COA member Maryann Scali, the sole purpose of the Center—approved in 2005 by a Town Meeting vote—is as a “senior center, and this is why it’s here and why millions of dollars was donated.” “Now the recreation department has moved in without our consent, without discussion,” she said at an earlier meeting.

Others believe the COA has only a single course to take.

“A resounding NO!”

“There’s nothing in your charge that allows you to have the Recreation Commission come in and do anything else. Your main function is to serve the elderly people in this town. So the answer to the town: ‘Can we bring the Recreation Department?’ should be a resounding NO!” said Mark D’Andrea.

Yet the town and the Select Board stand firm in their belief that there is reasonable cause to move forward with the transisition. While wanting to be very respectful of the COA, Select Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne said at its Monday, April 28 meeting that the board has long committed to continuing to have the Beech Street Center dedicated to seniors “from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.” For that reason, Dionne opposes the suggestion of bringing in a small number of town employees, which constitutes a full-fledged abandonment of the Center’s main role. 

“I really object to this claim that it’s a change of use. I don’t want that claim to go out there unanswered. To say there’s a change of use, in my mind, is to perpetuate a falsehood,” said Dionne. Town Administrator Patrice Garvin noted a recent reading of the 2011 Memorandum of Understanding by the town’s legal counsel refutes the change of use claims and renders the advocate’s challenge moot.

The board has pointed to practical reasons for the transistion. Select Board Vice Chair Matt Taylor said the move is coming at an opportune time as “there is a renewed energy and enthusiasm around our Senior Center” and the extra pair of hands and ability to extend the building’s hours that “there are real opportunities to serve our residents.”

“Bringing staff to the administrative offices would allow both staffs to share responsibilities while freeing up staff from the desk to help programming and services throughout the building, especially at later hours that seniors have been requesting,” said Taylor.

Community Services Director Brendan Fitts said the move would enhance efficiency while supporting cross-departmental collaboration. The COA and Rec. Department use the same software and share the same administrative backbone within the Community Service.

“[It] aligns with town goals,” said Fitts, as it is doing more with less with long-term savings, all the while maintaining the senior Center’s focus on serving the town’s elder community.

However, the chief cudgel the town holds over the COA vote are two past acts: stripping the independence of the Center and the COA, and Town Meeting passing changes to the Town Administrator’s position. After several seniors at the last public meeting suggested a much stronger response than a slowdown of the process – one going so far as suggesting the council resign en masse for failing its mission to promote elder services – COA member Joel Semuels told those attending that the COA is restrained by past presence from halting the move.

Samuels explained that the COA vote was only on whether to proceed with the construction project—including creating the new entrance and interior modifications—and on getting the Veterans and Recreation Department staff into this building. “That’s what this meeting is about,” he said. 

“The Recreation Department and the Veterans [Agent] and the COA are part of a Community Services Department. That is a reality right now. That horse has left the bar. The fact that the COA is not a free-standing Senior Center has already been decided. Last year, we fought that and lost, so we’re not returning.”

COA Chair Karen Donelan

“Town meeting by its vote a number of years ago, gave the town administrator the authority to oversee the staff of the Council on Aging,” added Our board can advocate. Our board can plead. Our board can suggest our board does not hire and fire staff. That is in the town administrator’s authority by vote of Town Meeting,” said Donelan.

“What we are saying [with the vote] is we want to delay until we can answer many of the questions that have been raised,” said said. “We don’t want to move ahead with what a legitimate policy process is. We’re doing our best to hear your questions and say, ‘Let’s answer them before we take a vote’.”