Feds Ties Belmont’s Hands Regulating 5G Cell Towers

By Leave a Comment

Photo: 5G small cell technology is coming whether Belmont likes it or not.

The future of ultra fast, ultra reliable, ultra cool mobile connection is coming to Belmont as a company in alliance with AT&T will present an application to install 5G small cell equipment at two locations in the Belmont Center area before the Board of Selectmen on Tuesday, May 14.

But don’t think that Belmont has much said in the matter. New Federal Communications Commission regulations called unprecedented in favoring corporate interests over local municipalities have tied the hands of town officials both here and around the country in any attempt to limit the number, height, and appearance of the hardware.

Just how tall are stand alone “small cell” towers? Try a 50 foot black cylinder pole with a lamp jutting out near the top.

“They are monstrously tall,” said Selectman Adam Dash as he pointed out height can not be challenged under the new F.C.C. regulations.

An example of the poles.

Aesthetically, the towers can appear as a light poll, the supporting equipment can be stored in enclosures shaped like mailboxes or, it can be designed to look like a tree.

With the prospects of the town soon being home to dozens of these new cell stations, the board attempted to dull that impact by voting for a package of “reasonable” restrictions that will pass federal muster.

“This is as good as we’re going to do in the time frame we have as we continue to work on it,” said Dash as the board approved a series of “life/safety” measures at its Monday, May 13 meeting so the town will have some limiting language on the books before Tuesday’s meeting.

Some of the 10 new regulations passed Monday included restrictions on poles in historic districts, they can not be within 10 feet of a house, the color of a new pole must be consistent with existing poles, a structural engineer is required to work on the project, there is no signage on the pole, a series of fees and there can not be cell equipment within 20 feet of each other.

These were the sort of “reasonable” restrictions the town’s counsel said would be defensible if challenged with the F.C.C. restrictions, said Dash who worked on an earlier draft of the regulations before it was reviewed and revised by legal counsel.

“We have some level of urgency to get this passed and then come back and [deal] with this later,” said Dash, adding he “wasn’t thrilled to having to do it quickly but I would rather get this done and then continue the discussion.”

Extenet Systems has applied to put a pole top antenna on one of the ornamental light posts in Belmont Center between 30 – 42 Leonard St. and the other on a Belmont Light light pole at 223 Channing Rd. The small cell antenna are located in an enclosed pod-like unit with the equipment supporting it secured either to the base or midway up the structure.

5G is the next generation of wireless internet which produces far faster speeds than existing cellular connections, allowing for a wide range of applications and uses. (For more see the explanation presented by CNBC.)

And it appears there will be quite a few of these these cell locations. Verizon, which along with AT&T are leading the installation of 5G in the area, noted online that “[W]e’re building a vast network of small cells, because a denser network is a crucial part of 5G Ultra Wideband deployment.”

According to a 2018 New York Times article, the new antennas will be placed an average of 500 feet apart to create complete customer coverage. When installed nationwide, 5G will add nearly one million more cell locations to the already 300,000 wireless cell stations in existence.

The installation rules being used by AT&T and Verizon was part of the F.C.C’s effort to have the US become the leader in 5G use and innovation. The FCC said the rules sought to “ban short-sighted municipal roadblocks that have the effect of prohibiting deployment of 5G.”

The federal rules make it easier for telecom industries to install its equipment by easing local zoning regulations, limiting fees and streamlining the review process. They include placing strict 60 day time limit for the board to make a decision after an application has been submitted.

The Times article noted without local regulations impeding its installation, telecommunications companies will be able to cheaply and quickly build out the system as “they cash in on the $250 billion in annual service revenue from 5G by 2025.”

Early this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit turned down a motion from a group of local governments to stay the F.C.C’s rules on the roll out of 5G technologies.

Those opposing the F.C.C. said local governments should be allowed to set its own regulations regarding the placement of telecom equipment on publicly-owned infrastructure rather than being forced to accept nationwide a one-size-fits-all approach.

The three selectmen said they are not opposed to the arrival of 5G to town, rather there remains a number of very practical questions – who pays for the electricity and running the wire to the pole and should the owner of the pole “be on board” with the placement of the antenna on their property – that need to be answered, said Dash.

During the meeting of the Belmont Light Board – made up of the Board of Selectmen – Belmont Light General Manager Christopher Roy stated he does not want the cell on Light Department structures for a myriad of reasons including the poles were not installed with additional equipment in mind.

“That’s when the rubber will hit the road,” said Dash of Roy’s objection.

2019 Belmont Annual Town Meeting, Segment A, Day 3

By 1 Comment

Photo: It’s town meeting

Welcome to possibly (hopefully) the final night of Segment A of the 2019 Belmont Town Meeting being held in the Belmont High School auditorium, Monday night, May 6.

Two big articles await the 290 plus members of Belmont’s legislative body, the first is voting on an extra $3.76 million for the renovation of the Belmont Police headquarters and additions to the Department of Public Works main building.

The second article will be the fourth time Town Meeting will either be debating or voting on changing the tenure of the Town Moderator from one to three years. The first vote was a razor-thin rejection of the article but in a tactical mistake worthy of the French at Agincourt, the “Nos” requested a roll call vote that resulted in accepting the three-year change.

The third time the article came before the meeting was this past Wednesday on a call for reconsideration that seeming laid on the assumption that members weren’t fully informed on the role of the moderator before voting one way or another. The debate along with a more than 90-minute presentation on a non-binding article on the town’s response to climate change resulted in the meeting adjourning past 11 p.m.

Why four bits at the apple on a seemingly non-controversial measure that Mike Widmer, the well-liked and respected moderator for the past 12 years who has come out saying he’d be in favor of whatever the meeting wants? The answer will likely come during the debate.

The under/over that the meeting ends by 11 p.m? 2 to 1 the over.

The meeting is about to start. Here’s the agenda:

7 PM: Reconvene the Special Town Meeting,

Article 1: The DPW/ Police Appropriation.

After the conclusion of the Special Town Meeting, the Annual Town Meeting resumes with the following articles in this order

  • Article 1,
  • Article 11, Community Preservation Community allocations.
  • Reconsideration of Article 10,
  • Article 9

Celtics up 5-3 in the first quarter.

7:06 p.m.: The roll call is being called to check the electronic voting. The question reveals only 2/3 of the meeting is following the Bruins this playoff season.

In a powerful speech from the moderator’s stand, Widmer said he is deeply concerned about “what’s happening with the roll call.” He said people are telling him that “people are feeling intimidated” and none of us should “be shamed” for the votes they take as the roll call is being “weaponize.”

“The fact that our democracy was built on dissent. And if we’re can’t embrace this in this town meeting, then we are in deep trouble,” said Widmer.

“Democracy is not a given,” he said. “

Anne Marie Mahoney is presenting the special town meeting for an added $3.76 million for the $7.9 million renovation of the police headquarters.

Just like the Kentucky Derby, a building project can have unexpected outcomes and the renovation of Police HQ is just like that. And the added funding is due to an added scope of work.

Ted Galante, the project architect, said the best way to do the most efficient building process and provide the most safety for the officers. He speeds through the designs.

Mahoney goes over the relocation of the police at the Water Dept. and the DPW, the trailers and talked about how the police will be traveling to and front the site. It will take 15 months.

Mahoney runs through the financing, a total of $12.5 million and explains that the $1.9 million in contingency which is more than the standard 10 percent. “This is an old building,” said Mahoney and there will be issues that pop up doing this work. If the meeting does not approve the article, it means the entire project must start over with either keep doing costly repairs or build a new headquarters for up to $60 million. Mahoney does her usual masterful job “selling” a project (or passing a budget) that there is cheering at the end of the presentation.

Questions include the energy efficiency of the future building and if the DPW is just as

Jamie Murphy, pct 5, asked why didn’t the building committee know that the scope of work could change resulting in an additional “ask” of $3.76 million, deeming it as a “bait and switch.” Mahoney said that was a “fair” complaint but the added funding comes with more information.

More questions on energy issues with the building, such as electrifying the building rather than using natural gas for heating.

The vote is underway and it passes 223-16.

The special town meeting is ended and the town meeting returns with the Community Preservation Committee requests. There are eight requests and seven projects for funding.

Bob McLaughlin, Pct 2, questions the work of the committee, whether it takes a vote on each of the project or if it simply “check the boxes” on its acceptability under the rules. Another question, who oversees each of the projects to get the best value for the bucks paid.

Now the projects:

  • the historic preservation of the facade of the Belmont Police Station for $787,575.10. Passes on a voice vote, some “nos” out there. 
  • repair of the slate roof at Town Hall, Homer Building and the School District Building for $100,000. Voice vote – overwhelming yes, two or three nos.
  • The request for the clock tower at the First Church is being removed due to some question of separation of church and state and could lead to litigation. Will likely come back next year after more work.

So there is a five-minute break. About time!

  • $1 million for the design of the community path from the Clark Street Bridge to Brighton Street. Selectman Adam Dash going over the history of the community path and its a long one. This is the second request for design work on the complete path, the first was $400,000 for an underpass at Alexander Avenue. The design phase is for the north side of the commuter rail track. “But until we start digging” the path could go back to the south side. But at least the design work is moving forward. A little extra – Belmont is requesting $300,000 from the state’s MassTrails Grant Program; while not a sure thing, it would be great to get to reimburse the town for the design work. A voice vote, all but one vote positive.
  • $60,000 to prepare for construction and bid documents of the Town Field Playground restoration. The cost of construction of the playground and courts will come back next year looking for $640,000. Voice vote, unanimously approved.
  • Payson Park Music Festival Bandstand for $90,000, to protect musicians during the festival concerts. Linda Oates, Pct 6, ask that the request be postponed because it’s not a “gazebo” which she said she supported in the past and that neighbors were not sufficiently informed. “My neighborhood is important to me,” she said. The postponement would last until there is a meeting the neighborhood and abutters. Anthony Ferrante, chair of the Rec Commission, said he was surprised that neighbors were not contacted and if that was the case, he would support a postponement. The vote for postponement passes 208-23.
  • $20,000 for preservation and restoration of vegetation around the bank of Clay Pit Pond. “This has been a disaster from what I see,” said John Robotham, pct 2, “Does anyone know what’s going on?” The path being built around the “pit” is different than the vegetation project. “Why isn’t this project part of the regular town budget?” is asked. Many questions on the effectiveness of such a project, the timing as the new high school is being built and pesticide use. Still passes 157-72.
  • Finally, $25,400 for preserving the meadow at Rock Meadow from invasive vegetation. It is adopted unanimously.

Now for the fourth time: Article 10, the term of office from one to three years for the Town Moderator. Mark Paolillo is taking over as moderator. This debate is if going from one to three years would be a more efficient way of governing.

Mike Widmer speaks why he presented this article. He points out what the duties of the moderator, he appoints four of 30 committees. He talks about the four committees (Warrant, Capital Budget, etc); these are legislative bodies as he acts on the Town Meeting’s behalf. This is done for the separation of powers. When he makes these appointments, he asks several people, Town Meeting members and groups while performing interviews before selecting that person. It is the process that moderators have been performing for years.

The debate comes down to this: those in support of the three-year term is that the moderator doesn’t actually have that much actual power and can be held accountable for their actions. Those who want to keep it at one year is that moderators have too much power and can be unaccountable for their personal whims. It’s interesting that a few members bring up the current political climate (not naming the administration in Washington DC, of course) to defend the one year term.

So the third vote on article 10; yes for three years; a no, one year.

The article is defeated, 141-82. And guess what? A roll call request! Who would have thought! And it passes with 39 votes. There will be no scrolling this time.

So the fourth vote is in and its 139-79 against.

That’s it. I lost my bet by two minutes! At least the Bruins won.

Roll Call, Wrong Call: 2019 Town Meeting Starts With A Topsy-Turvey Result

By 1 Comment

Photo: Belmont Town Moderator Mike Widmer

Those who are successful at the card table will agree a basic rule to stay in the game is not to “overplay your hand,” which the Cambridge Dictionary describes as “spoiling your chances of success by saying or doing too much.”

Oh, if only those Belmont Town Meeting Members who battled to keep the term of Town Moderator to one year had heeded that warning. After beating back an article to lengthen the moderator’s term to three years by a razor thin margin, they said “too much” by asking for a roll call vote.

And within mere minutes, those members snatched defeat from the jaws of victory as the legislative body went topsy turvey and

D’oh!

For a meeting seemingly devoid of “blockbuster” articles or amendments, the start of the 2019 Belmont Annual Town Meeting on Monday, April 29 sure had its share of memorial moments.

One hundred and sixty years of tradition was set aside, increasing affordable units in larger private developments, and were actions by the 290 member legislative body on Town Meeting’s first night.

But it was a seemingly inconsequential amendment changing the term of the Town Moderators tenure from one to three years proved to be the night’s highlight, demonstrating, as the great American philosopher Mike Tyson noted, “everyone has a plan until they get hit in the mouth.” And in this instance, the injury was self inflicted.

Supporting the article, Town Moderator Mike Widmer told the meeting he was not advancing the article for any personal reason; many municipalities have moved to a multi-year term for moderators as it provides continuity to a position that has taken on more roles and responsibilities in the past century. The change would take place in 2021. Widmer admitted he would happily accept any decision made by the legislative body he has presided over for the past dozen years.

The “no” group concerns were based on that expanding powers of the position which includes appointing the members of several important town bodies including the Warrant, Capital Budget and all building committees. They contend that this is too much responsibility for one person to have over that “long” period of time who could “stack the deck” for one side or another.

“There is on the national scene some great examples of people who are not component get appointed to roles that we really should think about,” said Claus Becker, Pct. 5.

And in one of closest votes in modern Town Meeting history – Town Clerk Ellen Cushman couldn’t say for certain if there were any tighter in the past century – Town Meeting rejected the article by two votes, 124 to 122.

But rather than taking its winnings and running for the door, the group that prevailed in besting the article suddenly requested a roll call vote, a second tally of members which their individual votes are recorded and made public on the main screen.

While a fairly rare occurrence in past Town Meetings, the action was not unexpected on Monday as a group of members declared on social media and at the auditorium they would request roll calls on three articles including the Moderator’s term.

Those promoting the planned roll calls said it was an attempt to bring a great level of transparency at Town Meeting, said Julie Crockett, Pct 6.

“Calling for a roll call is all about accountability,” said Crockett after the meeting. “It’s not an attempt to make anyone feel uncomfortable. For far too long Town Meeting has hid behind [aggregate] voting.”

Others town meeting members were not so kind to this tactic, calling it “vote shaming” as it identified the decisions of members who may take unpopular decisions. Earlier roll calls Monday on affordable housing and changing the name of the Board of Selectmen – both which passed by large numbers – saw the number opposing those articles fall from the first to the second vote as apparently some members didn’t want to be recorded on the “wrong side” of an issue.

“It’s intimidation,” said one member who while voting in the majority in earlier votes, was not happy with “taking down names. It’s not right.”

In an outcome that surprised many in the room, the subsequent vote resulted in the “yes” supporters victorious by two votes, 126 to 124. By zealotly sticking to its preconceived blueprint, the proponents for keeping the one year stint were left to rush to the Town Clerk’s office Tuesday morning to seek a reconsideration of their overplayed hand and a third bite of the apple. The reconsideration has been accepted, according to an email from the Town Clerk’s Office.

Name That Change

In other articles, a more than a century and a half tradition came to an end when the members overwhelmingly struck a blow for gender neutrality officially changing the name of the board of selectmen to the select board. The new name will become official in about three months, according to Town Counsel George Hall. The article initially passed, 238-11, with a roll call vote, the article was approved 243 to 4 with 4 abstaining.

“I only wish he had done this some time ago,” said Selectman Adam Dash.

The yearly gathering also approved by a more than two-thirds needed majority increasing the potential number of affordable housing units in large residential and for the first time in mixed-use projects by changing the existing bylaw. In the first vote, the measure passed 224-25.

“The impacts of these amendments will make Belmont more consistent with our peer communities, increase the production of affordable homes in development projects with 20 or more units, treat single and mixed-use developments the same … and make sure we are suited for the current environment. When development happens, we want to be ready by having a strong, inclusive policy in place,” said Rachel Heller, chair of the Belmont Housing Trust.

The members easily passed a zoning change to provide the same height and massing limitations on expansions and renovations of homes in the relatively small neighborhood along the east side of Pleasant Street adjacent the Route 2 off ramp as other neighborhoods in town. It passes 236 to 15.

2019 Belmont Annual Town Meeting, Segment A, Day 1

By Leave a Comment

Photo:

Welcome to the 2019 edition of the Belmont Town Meeting! We’ll get underway about 10 minutes late, which isn’t all that bad. Town Moderator Mike Widmer has called the meeting to order

We had the invocation and the flag ceremony thanks to the Boy and Girls scouts of Belmont.

And the annual check of the electronic voting machines. Seems to be working. New and re-elected members are sworn in by Town Clerk Ellen Cushman. The rules are read and the warrant is called. And longtime meeting members who are no longer serving are honored with Charles Hamon with the most years of service with 48 years.

The Town Meeting will be hearing the motions in the following order tonight: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 10.

The first two articles are housekeeping items.

The meeting now has Article 3 before it: Amending the “Inclusionary Housing” Zoning By-Law (which needs a two-thirds vote) – which sets the number of affordable units in residential housing projects – bringing Belmont’s By-Law into alignment with peer communities and clarifies and simplify subsections of the By-Law. It’s to reduce the threshold for when affordable housing is required, from 40 dwelling units to 20 (in which 12 percent of the development will be affordable); delete a provision that regulates mixed-use developments differently and simplifies the cash option to building affordable units.

Rachel Heller who is making the presentation said that Belmont needs affordable housing as home prices have outpaced income with nearly a third of Belmont residents could apply for affordable units.

The change will increase the production of affordable units and create a town’s policy is better suited for the current environment, said Heller.

The new amendments will not increase density in any one area, said the Planning Board. Anne Mahon asked if developers who construct across town can come under the law in the aggregate of units they build. Nope, is the answer.

The vote on the article is underway and passes easily 224-25. A roll call request is being asked which needs 35 votes. That is approved with 90 votes. This vote will be part of the public record. I wonder if this is a bit unneighborly.

Article 4 is now before the meeting. Another Zoning By-Law change which involves a small section of Pleasant Street within two blocks of the Route 2 off-ramp that will “ensure that tear down/rebuilds and additions reflect the current character of the neighborhood in terms of density, mass, bulk, height, etc.”

This originally came to the Planning Board as a petition to ask that their neighborhood be protected from oversized mega homes. This is a neighborhood that is much like the zoning of the nearby streets (SRC) with 2/3 of lots being non-conforming which could lead to additions or added floors in his hilly location to have an oversized visual impact.

The changes will make the area much like the zoning nearby. You’ll now need a special permit from the Planning Board if your addition is more than 30 percent or 700 sq.-ft. or increase in stories or the overall height to the ridge on nonconforming lots. The special permit can be granted if the height and mass are in harmony with surrounding homes and is sensitive to topographical considerations.

Questions are not actually pertaining to the measure Rachel Berger, Pct. 2 and SRB resident, said this article is the continuation of protecting homeowners from overbuilding and large expansion that started in the General Residences zone. “We are all one Belmont.”

This requires a 2/3s vote. It’s 236 to 15 in favor, 96 percent to 6 percent.

Article 5 is to amend the General Bylaw concerning kennels. George Hall, Town Counsel, said this article is simply keeping up with state law which changed the monetary fines of violating the kennel bylaw. A voice vote approval.

Article 6, the end of tradition! The selectmen will become members of the “Select Board.” Already cheers from a few members. Selectman Adam Dash said it’s not just cosmetic; it’s the only elected body with a gender-specific title. “I only wish we did this long ago,” said Dash. Cheers.

With the exception of Don Mercier, Pct. 8, who, as a traditionalist, is opposing the article, overwhelming support for the name change. 238 to 11. It will take effect after the state AG accepts the results of the meeting, in about three months. A roll call request passes with 118. Now the margin is 243 to 4 with 4 abstained.

Article 7 is dismissed as its the citizens petition for the name change for the board of selectmen.

The final article of the night, number 10, is to support a home rule amendment to change the term of the Town Moderator from 1 to 3 years. Mike Widmer, who recused himself from his position for this article, said the trend statewide is moving to a three-year term.

Jack Weis, Pct 1, said continuity is important to do the job well so a three years is preferred.

Anne Mahon, Pct 4, said to have a three-year term for a position who selects members of many important committees such as the Warrant Committee could easily be abused. Claus Becker, Pct. 6, said it’s better to have someone who can learn as an assistant rather than having someone with so much power. Julie Crockett, Pct 5, said it’s comforting to have to vote for this position. The question has been moved.

Easily passed, so the vote on the article: Wow: 122 to 124 against the article. Did not see that coming. A roll call vote has been asked. It will need 35 votes. It passes so here we go with the roll call. 126 to 124! It passes! And I called it! Four members who didn’t vote the first time tallied their votes while the no votes stayed solid.

And that’s that for the night. See you on Wednesday, May 1.


Annual Town Meeting Gets Underway Monday, April 29

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Meeting in action.

While there doesn’t appear to be any “blockbuster” articles before them, the Belmont annual Town Meeting which convenes at 7 p.m., on Monday, April 29 at Belmont High School, there will be a few items that will spark interest of the 290 member body.

One of those items is likely to be Article 1 of the Special Town Meeting on May 1 when the building committee for the renovation of the Police Headquarters and the DPW returns to request up to $3.5 million over the $7.4 million last year’s meeting approved to do the job. The extra money is needed to relocate the police personnel offsite, for more extensive renovations and the higher cost of construction. It’s not unusual for Town Meeting to scrutinize any second go-around for funds after approving a project the year before they assumed was complete.

Another is the proposed change to the inclusionary housing zoning bylaw – which sets the number of affordable units in residential housing projects – bringing Belmont’s By-Law into alignment with peer communities and clarifies and simplify subsections of the By-Law by reducing the threshold for when affordable housing is required, from 40 dwelling units to 20 (in which 12 percent of the development will be affordable); deleting a provision that regulates mixed-use developments differently and simplifying the cash option to building affordable units. These measures could come under fire as dampening future large residential development in Belmont.

The Town Meeting will hearing the motions in the following order: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 8, 9 and 11.

  • The first two articles are housekeeping items.
  • Article 3: Amending the “Inclusionary Housing” Zoning By-Law (needs a two-thirds vote)
  • Article 4: Another Zoning By-Law change which involves a small section of Pleasant Street within two blocks of the Route 2 off ramp that will “ensure that tear down/rebuilds and additions reflect the current character of the neighborhood in terms of density, mass, bulk, height, etc.”
  • Article 5: Article on kennels and dogs.
  • Article 6: The one which will do away with 160 years of tradition by making gender neutral the name of the Board of Selectmen to the “Select Board.”
  • Article 7 will be withdrawn as it was a citizen’s petition that is now taken up by Article 6.
  • Article 10 is to support a home rule amendment to change the term of the Town Moderator from 1 to 3 years.
  • Article 8 and 9 are non-binding articles; 8 is the Belmont Climate Action Resolution while 9 is to support efforts on the state level to allow the right to repair on electronic equipment.
  • Article 11 is to approve projects to be funded by the Community Preservation Committee.

If the meeting does not conclude the Segment A warrant articles on Monday, April 29, it will continue th meeting to Wednesday, May 1 at 7 p.m.   

On Wednesday, May 1 at 7 p.m., the meeting will reconvene starting with a report by Anne Marie Mahoney, chair of the DPW/Police Project Building Committee. At 7: 30 p.m. the meeting will recess from the Annual Town Meeting warrant and take up the articles in the Special Town Meeting, in the order: 2, 3, 4 and 1. 

  • Article 2 of “The Special” will approve transferring $3,663 excess premiums from the sale of general obligation bonds to the Kendall Fund.
  • Article 3 will approve the spending of a State Transportation Infrastructure Fund which will go to the improvement of the intersection of Lexington and Sycamore.
  • Article 4 is the paying of old bills.

It’s anticipated Article 1 of the Special will be taken up on Monday, May 6.

If all of the business of Segment A of the Annual Town Meeting and the Special Town Meeting does not conclude on May 6, the Meeting will resume on May 8.

Segment B Articles – all budget-related items – of the Annual Town Meeting will be taken up beginning Wednesday, May 29.  

Correction: In an earlier version of the article, there was a reference to an amendment to the planning board’s change to the “inclusionary housing zoning bylaw” as watering down the number of affordable units. That was an incorrect reading of the amendment and has been corrected.

Schools Budget Tops $60M In Fiscal ’20, Up 6.4 Percent

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Schools budget has increased by 40 percent in the past five years.

With some tweaks here and there still to come, the Belmont School Committee was presented with the coming fiscal year’s district budget at its meeting on Tuesday, April 23.

And fiscal 2020 will see the final number breach the $60 million barrier as the total FY ’20 budget will increase 6.4 percent to top off at $60.6 million, according to District Superintendent John Phelan.

The figure is no surprise to the team creating this year’s “town-wide” budget, which projected earlier this year the schools would come in at $61 million. The total town ’20 budget is forecast to reach $129 million, nearly 12 percent over fiscal 2019, with capital (up 52 percent) and fixed costs (42 percent) skyrocketing.

In the past five years, the schools budget has jumped 40 percent from $43.6 million in fiscal ’15.

Phelan said the schools budget is made up of three parts. The roll-forward section which is made up of existing staff and contractual increases is by far the largest of the three. In fiscal ’20, it increases by 3.5 percent from $56.99 million to $58.98 million.

The segment for strategic plan costs, expenses to maintain Belmont’s strong educational core, came in at $880,500, a 1.6 percent increase. The money will be used to keep student fees stable and increase the number of teachers and staff by 3.6 positions:

  • increase guidance counselors by 1.4 positions so each elementary school will a full-time counselor,
  • add .4 percent of a position to add a middle school foreign language teacher, a high school teacher and an assistant principal at the high school, and
  • create a district-wide English Language Learner Program Director.

Finally, there are out of the district cost divers. One area is a town-wide health insurance increase of eight percent as well as jumps in Special Education tuitions, transportation and services, rising expenses by $786,000.

The schools budget will be presented to the annual Town Meeting for approval in June during the second session of the meeting.

meant to keep K

Apply for the Police Chief Screening Committee

By Leave a Comment

Photo:

The Belmont Board of Selectmen has recently created the Police Chief Screening Committee to assist in the search for Belmont’s next Police Chief.. 

The Board is looking for two residents with a variety of talents and backgrounds who are willing to make the commitment to serve on this committee.  This committee will consist of nine voting members.

Residents who are interested in serving are invited to apply using the application specific to this particular committee which can be located on the Town website:  https://www.belmont-ma.gov/sites/belmontma/files/uploads/citizen_application.pdf

If you have any questions related to this committee or the appointment process, please contact Jessica Porter, Human Resources Director, at 617-993-2740 or jporter@belmont-ma.gov In order to be considered for one of the two available seats, applications must be returned to Porter no later than Friday, May 31.

Selectmen OK Pay, Merit Hike for Town Administrator

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Patrice Garvin, Belmont’s town administrator

After receiving a positive job evaluation two weeks ago, the Belmont Board of Selectmen at its April 22 meeting increased Belmont’s Town Administrator Patrice Garvin’s paycheck so she’s a bit closer to what her peers in town government are taking home.

In addition to salary and merit raises for Garvin, the town administrator presented a list of goals for this coming fiscal year, according to the town’s Human Resources Director Jessica Porter

The selectmen provided Garvin, who began her tenure in Belmont in January 2018, a two percent cost of living increase and two percent merit payment retroactive to July 1, 2018 (the first day of the fiscal year 2019) and an identical pay and merit package hike effective this July 1.

In addition, the board increased the town administrator’s vehicle allowance from $2,400 to $7,500 as of July 1 to assist her daily commute from her Chelmsford home.

Garvin’s total compensation package on July 1 will be approximately $189,300. Her starting compensation was $170,400.

The final package still leaves Garvin behind the average compensation of $206,450 for town administrators and city managers of 14 comparable nearby municipalities, according to an analysis by Porter.

Garvin presented the board with her goals and their subsequent objectives for the coming year. They include providing financial leadership, improving the overall effectiveness and efficiency of town government and promoting economic development.

The complete list of goals and objectives are below:

GOAL 1:  Finance/Budget

The Town Administrator shall work closely with the Selectmen, Warrant Committee, Capital Budget Committee, Town Treasurer and Town Accountant in providing financial leadership, to provide a balanced budget to Town Meeting.

Objectives:

  1. Work with the Superintendent to develop two operating budgets for FY21. One with an override and one without.
  2. Continue to work with Finance Team to develop five year budget forecasts.
  3. Work with the Financial Task Force II to assist them in providing the Board of Selectmen Financial recommendation.
  4. Seek out grants and other funding sources that will take pressure off of the operating budget.

GOAL 2:  Operations/Service Delivery

The Town Administrator shall strive to establish a positive working environment with employees, to ensure the best delivery of services to the residents of Belmont. 

Objectives:

  1. Continue to inform and educate staff through department head meetings, and through moral building exercises.
  2. Continue to conduct reviews for all non-union employees.
  3. Support the HR Director in negotiating successor agreements with collective bargaining units.
  4. Work with the departments to ensure that the most productive, cost efficient services are being provided to the residents.
  5. Assist with shepherding major building projects to completion (i.e., Belmont High School Project, DPW Building, Police Station, etc.).

GOAL 3:  Open and Transparent Government

The Town Administrator shall keep the selectmen and citizens informed of governmental activities and strive to improve the overall effectiveness and efficiency of Town government.

Objectives:

  1. Maintain that all materials are made public on the town website; better utilize other digital resources; keep all other web content current.
  2. Ensure that all selectmen minutes are up to date and approved in a timely manner.
  3. Establish a way to continue to use social media to disseminate information.

GOAL 4:  Economic Development

The Town Administrator shall work to promote economic development.

Objectives:

  1. Work with the Business Study Group to provide the final deliverable of their charge.
  2. If an Economic Development Committee is formed work with that committee and the Business Study Group to foster ways to improve on what has been identified.
  3. Continue to work and build relationships with the business community.

GOAL 5: Public Communication

The Town Administrator shall be an active participant in the Belmont Community.

Objectives:

  1. Attend community events as time allows.
  2. Continue working with committees/boards and elected officials to advance projects in town.
  3. Continue to work with Belmont Media.
  4. Continue to be open to all residents’ concerns and connect them to the town departments that will assist.

GOAL 6: Personal and Professional Growth

The Town Administrator shall pursue professional development opportunities. 

Objective:

  1. Attend professional meetings, seminars and conferences including the ICMA, MMA annual conference and regional meetings. 
  2. Apply to become a candidate under the ICMA Certified Managers program.
  3. Continue to reach out to neighboring communities and to identify areas of possible regional efforts.

After No Deal By Purecoat, Community Path Design Focus On North Of Tracks

By 2 Comments

Photo: Community path now on the northside.

It’s now the north side.

The proposed community path from Belmont Center to the Cambridge line will now be going along the north side of the MBTA commuter rail tracks after town representatives could not come to an agreement with a prominent Belmont property owner to take a portion of a structure needed for the path to navigate a “pinch point” along the route.

At its Monday, April 22 meeting, the Belmont Board of Selectmen voted 3-0 to OK using $1 million in Community Preservation Committee funds in design work for a recreational trail along a community right-of-way on the north side the tracks from the proposed Alexander Avenue underpass to the intersection of Brighton Street.

“It looks like we are going to proceed with a north route for the next phase of design,” said Chair Tom Caputo.

The $1 million CPC request will come before the annual Town Meeting next week. The town is also in the running for state money to pay for construction of the path, contingent on the town beginning the design process.

The board reversed a 2-1 vote on Feb. 25 to tentatively conduct that design for a southern route that would go behind Belmont High School. That vote was conditioned on the outcome of a 60-day negotiation period with the Tosi family to secure the ownership or an easement of the Purecoat North building along Hittinger Street currently used by the dog daycare business Crate Escape.

The purchase or taking of the building was necessary after the consulting firm Pare Corp., which conducted the feasibility study of the path, said the trail would not be wide enough along a 100-foot section to pass regulatory muster by the state’s Department of Transportation and MBTA, and for emergency vehicles to access.

Bob McLaughlin, who with former Selectman Mark Paolillo represented the Board of Selectmen in the negotiation, told the board they spoke with the building managers at the site and with the owners on the phone.

“I really think they tried,” said McLaughlin, hiring an architect and engineer to review the proposals.

“They came back and said it was too much to take part of the building. And they weren’t willing to sell as it didn’t make sense for their purposes,” said McLaughlin.

“You win some, you lose some,” said McLaughlin.

McLaughlin noted this marks the second time the Tosi’s rejected a proposal for town use of the building, saying no in 2011 to $6 million for the sale of the building for the construction of a new Belmont Light substation. The station would eventually end up on Flanders Road.

It was clear the selectmen were not eager to begin an eminent domain process of taking the needed space, an action which Belmont Town Counsel George Hall cautioned would be “substantial financial risks to the town.” It would also be unlikely such a measure could pass Town Meeting which would need to approve a property taking by a two-thirds vote “would be a tough sell.”

Selectman Adam Dash, the lone no vote back in February, said with state money possibly on the table, “we can’t drag this out” noting that during the design phase complications could arise that would force the path’s location to be reconsidered once again.

“You got to start somewhere so you have to pick,” said Dash.

The vote was good news for Russell Leino, the chair of the Community Path Project Committee which wrote the design phase request for proposal without the certainity of what the firms would be bidding on.

“I’m very very glad about the decision because it’s hugely helpful for the committee. The [design] RFP is already out and we are having a bidder’s conference on Friday where we’ll tell them about the decision,” he said.

Correction: In an earlier version of this story, the name of the family owning the Purecoat North site was misidentified as Tocci. The property is owned by the Tosi family.

Prescription Drug Take-Back At DPW Yard; Sat., April 27

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Poster for the national drug take-back day.

The Belmont Police Department in conjunction with the Belmont Auxiliary Police and the Drug Enforcement Agency will be hosting a prescription drug Take-Back Initiative to prevent the abuse and theft of old, unused and expired prescription drugs.

The Belmont Police will have a collection point set up at the DPW yard, 37C St., (off Waverley) on Saturday, April 27 from 10 a.m. – 2 p.m. Old or unused prescription drugs (no liquids) may be dropped off for free with no questions asked. You won’t even have to get out of your car. Please take some time to check your medicine cabinet and visit Belmont Police on the 27th.

Prescription drugs are highly susceptible to misuse by family and friends. In addition, they can be improperly disposed of and end up in our environment, posing a potential health hazard.

For more information on the Rx Drug Take Back Initiative or a list of additional collection sites visit www.dea.gov . You may also contact Assistant Chief James MacIsaac at jmacisaac@belmontpd.org

The Belmont PD also has a permanent Rx drug collection kiosk located in the lobby of the police station that is accessible 24/7.