Belmont Town Meeting: Night 2, May 6

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont T0wn Meeting.

Welcome back to the 156th annual Belmont Town Meeting. Tonight’s the second night of Town Meeting with the Community Preservation Committee’s grants up for debate and transfers. 

7:05 p.m.: And we are off … five minutes late, as usual. 

7:08 p.m.: Moderator Mike Widmer announced that Article 9 will be reconsidered in June. In addition, Widmer said he was a “stunned as you” to have heard the Lord’s Prayer by one of the religious leaders who gave the invocation. “We hope that this will not happen again.” Widmer said the Lord’s Pray is a beautiful one but it does violate the separation of church and state. 

Long-standing member are recognized.

7:15 p.m.: A commemoration of the Waverley Trail with a special proclamation from the Department of Interior and the US Park Service recognizing the trail as a National Recreation Trail. What a great honor for the town.

 7:28 p.m.: An we are off with presentations.

First up is Jim Palmer, GM of Belmont Light, with an update on the substation project. Palmer said that permitting, engineering and procurement is nearly complete while construction is 10 percent complete. A June 2016 completion date for the project “is still achievable.” The project is on budget. But there are challenges ahead like managing contracts and working with the MBTA. 

7:36 p.m.: The Special Town Meeting is next with a pair of articles: to allow for the transfer of money from reserve accounts to pay down the deficits in the school department (about a half-a-million dollars due largely to skyrocketing special education costs) and about $750,000 in the snow removal account. 

First up, Article 1, a historic winter left the snow and ice account about $750,000 in the red. That money will come from free cash. Typically, Belmont gets 50 inches, we got more than 100 inches, and that will cost money, said David Kale, Town Administrator. Belmont could see between $250,000 to $275,000 in federal emergency fund but it’s not likely it will be received by June 30; when it comes in, it goes to free cash. The article is adopted unanimously. 

Article 2, seeks a transfer of $285K from the Warrant Committee’s reserve fund and $250K from the Special Ed Stabilization Fund to cover the deficit in the School Department. The reason for the debt: special ed costs. 

Discussion? Vincent Stanton, Pct, 2, will special ed cost fluctuation or is this systemic? Professional opinion by John Phelan, superintendent, is that growth will continue. Follow up, is there some way to bring special ed students back to town? Currently, there is not sufficient space, said Phelan, and that would help. And with students with like needs, you can begin and grow programs to bring the number down. No other discussion. The article passes with one negative voice vote. Electronically, the vote is 233 to 11.

 Now back to the regular meeting. Up is the Community Preservation Committee grants of $1.1 million.  

They, all community generated, are:

  • Belmont Veterans Memorial Project: $150,000,
  • Wellington Station exterior restoration and rehabilitation: $26,300,
  • Electrical upgrade at units owned by the Belmont Housing Authority: $522,500,
  • Digitization of historic Belmont newspapers from 1890 to 1983: $25,000.
  • Rehabilitation and restoration of the 1853 Homer House: $100,000.
  • Upgrade and restore the Pequossette Park tennis courts: $295,000.

Each grant gets its own update. PQ courts are in rough shape, said DPW director Jay Marcotte. So all four courts will be removed and refilled. It will take 30 to 60 days to do and will last 20 years. Jennifer Page, Pct. 3, wonders if this is too much money to pay to preserve tennis courts. Maryann Scali, Pct. 2, said let’s repair them correctly so the town has many years of playing on it. Sylvia Cruz, Pct. 5, asked shouldn’t the town look at recreation activities more broadly, once again wondering if this is a lot of money for courts. We spend $295,000 on courts when if the town looked broadly that the money could be used elsewhere. Floyd Carman, Town Treasurer and member of the Community Preservation Committee said the CPC looks at all applications but it has to be brought to the committee. Deb Lockett, Pct. 7, asked if outside sources which use the courts could pay the town for its use. Anthony Ferrante, Pct. 8 and CPC member, said a task force is being created that will look at all courts to determine usage and support. The measure is adopted. 

Next up is the Veterans Memorial Project. Kevin Ryan, chair of the project’s committee, describes the project. The project can be finished by Veteran’s Day in November, he said.

Vince Stanton, Pct. 2, said the memorial is described as a park, has landscaping been discussed? Ryan said the group did not but hope that groups that does it now will continue to do so. The project is adopted unanimously. 

Susan Smart, director of the Homer House, describes the restoration project which includes repairing the cupola and three porches which are in bad shape. This will lay the foundation for private, state and possibly federal contributions. Support this because of cultural tourism, as a television crew said how wonderful the house remain. “Thank goodness for those dames,” one said for saving the project. The great Belmontian Lydia Ogilby, Pct. 1, said she supports the project “because I’m one of those dames.” The article is adopted unanimously. 

The Belmont Public Library submitted the digitalization of old Belmont newspapers. Kathleen Keohane, Pct. 2, and head of the Board of Library Trustees, said the reason to computerize papers from 1890 to 1923 will make it searchable which makes it easier to research and use. Many towns are doing this and the Boston Public Library is creating a digitization lab to make the content is accessible to the country and world. Don Mercier, Pct 8, can this information be placed on a hard disk for our own files. Yes, that information will have access – maybe not on disk – and you can tell how many people use it. Mercier wonders if the information can be on a hard disk – “not on that sky thing” – and use it for the town’s purposes. Penelope Schafer, Pct. 7, asks if the project will move quicker than the town records which received funds in 2013. Town Clerk Ellen Cushman said actually the level of work for the town records was massive and, actually, is about to be completed. The motion is adopted unanimously.

8:54 p.m.: Up now is the Wellington Station restoration. The money will help preserve the well-known landmark adjacent to the First Church, Belmont. It’s been around before Belmont was a town. Vince Stanton, Pct. 3, asked if other funds were sought to help restore the building as the Belmont Historical Society has a bit of money that could have been used. No we didn’t, said Carman. Was there any exploration of having a contractor do the work for a sign? The motion is adopted unanimously. 

9:09 p.m.: “We will be out of here before 11,” said Carman. Yikes! Did the treasurer jinks us?

Donna Hamilton, director of the Belmont Housing Authority, said that this year’s request is the continuation of rewiring the final 19 buildings in Belmont Village. Steve Klionsky, Pct. 6, asks why is the Housing Authority is asking for more money when last year’s money hasn’t been spent yet. Hamilton said the work is currently being bid out, so its heading forward.

Norma Massarotti, Pct 6, asks if the authority should use last year’s money to find out just how much it will cost to perform the work and then come back next year for the rest of the money. Hamilton said the systems need to be upgraded from the existing wires put in the 1940s as tenants have greater electronic needs.

It’s shocking that nothing has been done due to safety reasons, said Christine Kochem, Pct. 8. Hamilton said she agreed, but they wanted to come up with a good plan rather than the quickest. Kochem returned to ask a timetable. Hamilton said first units will be built out soon and the entire two projects should be done by next May.

“I’m very disappointed that you haven’t spent the money from last year. Just for that, I’ll have to vote against it,” said Don Mercier, Pct. 8.

Sylvia Cruz said the CPC should not have to pay to do what the state should be doing as this request takes away the town’s investment in other areas such as open space. There’s some applause.

Sami Baghdady, Selectmen chair, agrees and a letter will be going to the state on this issue. But that should not stop the town from doing repairs for a valuable housing source for low-income residents. He also said this should be done for safety reasons.

The motion is voted on and adopted.

Widmer “really urges” Town Meeting Members to get as many questions answered in advance because most of the questions members asked tonight could have been answered” beforehand. Cheers. Carman said he is willing to come to any precinct meetings to answer questions.

Final article, for CPC administrative costs of $56,200. It passes and we are about to adjourned until June for the budget. It’s 9:41 p.m., a record. 

The Return: Solar Power Article To Be Reconsidered by Town Meeting

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Town Meeting.

The solar power article – effectively killed off by an amendment postponing indefinitely a vote on the measure on the first night of the Belmont Town Meeting, Monday, May 4 – has returned from the grave after newly-elected Selectman Jim Williams requested the Town Meeting revisit the contentious initiative possibly one more time. 

While voting for the amendment submitted by former Ralph Jones, Williams told the Belmontonian that the decision didn’t “sit well the day after” so he approached Belmont Town Clerk Ellen Cushman early Tuesday to request “a motion to reconsider” which is allowed under town meeting rules.

While Town Moderator Mike Widmer will inform Town Meeting on the reconsideration on the send night of Town Meeting, Wednesday, May 6, the earliest the actual vote on reconsideration will take place is in June, according Cushman.

At that time, Williams will speak on his request, discussion will take place before Town Meeting takes a vote on the reconsideration, which must pass by a 2/3 margin to be placed back before the members. 

If it does reach that plateau, Article 9 will be debated and will need to reach the standard 50 percent plus one vote to be adopted.

William said he believed his vote Monday, which passed overwhelmingly by Town Meeting, was “basically a ‘timeout’ for all parties to settle down and let the new Light Board do its work,”  referring to the board made up of the Selectmen which approves policy for Belmont Light, the town’s public electric utility. 

“[I] learned that the motion to postpone indefinitely was primarily used as a motion to dismiss and is normally employed by town officials when an article has been overcome by events and should be dismissed,” said Williams.

“This clearly was not my voted intention and so the decision to file for reconsideration was straight forward,” he said in an email Tuesday, May 5, 

Williams said, in his opinion, Town Meeting deserve to hear all sides debate the article “and … vote up or down on what [Town Meeting] want to do or should not be able to do.”
The article, which came to Town Meeting as a citizen petition, would place on the town ballot a non-binding resolution to request the town’s state legislators to vote for state legislation that would require Belmont and other municipal utilities to provide solar users favorable treatment when crediting solar owners for the electricity they add to the grid.
Yet many Town Meeting were incredulous with the measure when they discovered there is not state legislation for the legislators to vote on, and that the measure was presented to Town Meeting as a method to begin a discussion on promoting solar power. 

Preview of the Second Night of Belmont Town Meeting, May 6

By Leave a Comment

Photo: 

The second night of the 156th edition of Belmont Town Meeting takes place on Wednesday, May 6 as the meeting reconvenes at 7 p.m. at Belmont High School to hopefully complete the remaining non-budgetary issues before the 290-member legislative body.

The evening will revolve around debate on the $1.1 million in grants coming from the Community Preservation Committee.

They include:

  • Belmont Veterans Memorial Project: $150,000,
  • Wellington Station exterior restoration and rehabilitation: $26,300,
  • Electrical upgrade at units owned by the Belmont Housing Authority: $522,500,
  • Digitization of historic Belmont newspapers from 1890 to 1983: $25,000.
  • Rehabilitation and restoration of the 1853 Homer House: $100,000.
  • Upgrade and restore the Pequossette Park: $295,000.

There will likely be questions from Town Meeting on public money being used on a private residence such as the Homer House (owned by the Belmont Woman’s Club) and why residents tax money (the CPC receives its funding from a surtax on property taxes) is being used to repair the electrical wiring at buildings which are run by the state. 

In addition, a Special Town Meeting will be convened to allow for the transfer of money from reserve accounts to pay down the deficits in the school department (about a half-a-million dollars due largely to skyrocketing special education costs) and about $750,000 in the snow removal account. 

Selectmen To Give $386K to Capital Budget Rather than Taxpayers

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Board of Selectmen.

What would you do with an extra $386,000 in next year’s budget? Give it back to taxpayers? How about spending it right off to repair the roads? 

“That $386,000 has generated quite a bit of discussion around town,” said Sami Baghdady, the chair of the Belmont Board of Selectmen.

Before Town Meeting on Monday, May 4, the Selectmen tentatively decided the $386,000 in additional state aid the town was not expecting into next fiscal town budget will be heading over to the Capital Budget Committee to be used to assist big-ticket items.

“Finally, all our pleading paid off,” said Anne Marie Mahoney, chair of the Capital Budget Committee, after the meeting.

Town Meeting will need to approve the allocation to Capital Budget in June when budget articles are voted.

After debating for more than a month what to do with the funds, the Selectmen’s decision to park the money in a Capital Budget Stabilization Fund comes at the expense of taxpayers. By not increasing the tax levy by the “extra” state funding, residential homeowners would have saved on next year’s tax bill, according to Town Treasurer Floyd Carman.

“Having just voting a considerable override, this would be a little bit of relief, maybe $40 to $50 or so to the taxpayers,” said Baghdady. 

“I’d really like to turn the money back to the residents, but we need to give direction,” said Selectman Mark Paolillo. 

Yet during last week’s Warrant Committee meeting, Town Moderator Mike Widmer called the tax relief move “a gimmick” as there are real needs to be serviced in town. 

Other possible uses included replenishing the Belmont School Department’s special education stabilization fund, the entire $250,000 in the account will be used to fill a $500,000 budget gap facing the department this year.

But there is a real need for the Capital Budget Committee to obtain additional funds since the $240,000 it will receive from the $4.5 million Proposition 2 1/2 override approve by voters in April to finance a million dollars in bonds for miscellaneous items, is about to be used to replace to the 45-year-old fire alarm system at Belmont High School. Belmont’s Fire Chief David Frizzell said if the system fails, the high school building will be closed.

“So the intention of giving us more money to fund our pay-as-you-go capital budget is not happening because it’s going to the fire alarm system,” said Mahoney.

“It’s frustrating to us … expecting that when the override passed we would get some more money to deal with our list,” she said.

When Paolillo asked Mahoney if the committee needed the money, she listed off a half dozen “immediate” projects that requires action. 

By the end of the meeting, the Selectmen believed the best use of the $386,000 is by providing Capital Budget with the extra cash.

The Capital Budget Committee is meeting on Wednesday, May 6, at 6 p.m. at Belmont High School to discuss how the extra money will be allocated.

Solar Flare Up: Town Meeting Rejects Petition as Members Voice Concerns

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Meeting.

Tempers flared as Town Meeting members rejected an article hoping to spark a conversation about the future of solar power that one member called “too squishy” on the first night of the annual Belmont Town Meeting held Monday, May 4, at Belmont High School.

Tensions rose to a point unseen in recent years when the presenter of the solar power article accused some members of being too scared to debate the subject.

“What are you afraid of? A conversation? An argument? Having different opinions? It’s sort of like ‘let’s not talk about this’. ‘Let’s keep it under the table’,” queried Roger Wrubel, Precinct 5, as fellow members shouted out “point of order!” to Town Moderator Mike Widmer – who previously sternly rebuked a few members for straying from the narrow nature of article – who moments later admonished Wrubel for making accusations against a member of the Board of Selectmen.

Former Selectman Ralph Jones, who filed an successful amendment to the article to delay indefinitely the citizens petition, said bad blood has been boiling over in the past year during the crafting and implantation of a new set of rules for solar customers approved by the Light Board (which is comprised of the Board of Selectmen) in December, only to be set aside two weeks ago.

“[B]oth sides on this issue really want to fight tonight. A fight to the death … A fight to the pain,” Jones said, referring to a quote from “The Princess Bride.”

Jones than quoted a citizen who said “… Fighting over this issue is not helping our efforts to reduce carbon emissions. It’s just getting in our way.”

In the end, while the majority of members did not appear hostile towards solar energy, the legislative body once again was reluctant to support an article which was, at best, confusing and apparently counter to the true nature of the measure.

Wubel said just that, noting that the article’s aim, to bring a non-binding resolution to the voters that would ask the town’s state legislators to vote for a legislative measure that doesn’t exist.

“[The article] is to start a conversation on solar energy at Town Meeting,” said Wrubel.

Town Meeting also sent a message that it wished to follow the advice of the newly-constituted Light Board – with the inclusion of newly-elected Selectman Jim Williams and chaired by Sami Baghdady – to allow it to write a Belmont-specific plan to assist in promoting greater solar usage.

“This was a wake-up call for Belmont,” said Baghdady.

And while proponents of the measure – which would have placed a non-binding referendum on the town’s ballot – left the Belmont High School auditorium in a huff after its defeat, it was pointed out that the status quo in Belmont today gives the pro-solar power what they have long been seeking.

“Until a new policy is created, Belmont has full net metering. Isn’t that what they want?” said Baghdady after the meeting. 

Wrubel’s presentation spoke of the success of solar statewide but how past and future policies were affecting progress in Belmont.

The goals of this non-binding resolution is to ensure that Belmont Light [the town’s electrical utility] “treat their solar customers the same as solar customers as they are throughout the state,” said Wrubel, pointing out that 30 of 40 municipal utilities uses a concept called net metering that credits solar owners for the electricity they add to the grid.

Unlike other utilities in the state, Wrubel said what Belmont Light is doing is not providing retail pricing but a small fee to solar generators. That is one of the reasons Belmont has only 20 residents with solar arrays.

“The effects of the policy that the Light Board has been discussing and eventually pass really has a chilling effect on people willing to take on solar in Belmont,” said Wrubel.

Jones introduces Patty DiOrio, of the Belmont Municipal Light Advisory Board – which wrote the draft plan that is no longer being used – who said the article “effectively says that we shouldn’t decide for ourselves whether or not we have certain policies surrounding solar or any other type of green energy.”

DiOrio said many utilities are currently questioning net metering “so we are in good company” and much of that has to do with all customers paying a “subsidy” to allow solar users to use the grid but not pay for the systems upkeep that has a lot of fixed costs.

DiOrio noted that a state task force on solar power released a report last week saying “people using the grid should pay their fair share; it was a consensus agreement.”

“So you can vote no on this article and know that you are not anti-solar,” said DiOrio. “Why do we want to give up our local control? Why would we want to endorse a policy that is neither market-based nor cost based?”

Jones, who spent the previous weekend in a “shuttle diplomacy” to find a compromise between the two sides which proved unsuccessful, presented his amendment to the article tabling the measure indefinitely.

“I proposed postponing this for a while to let tempers cool down,” said Jones, pointing out the Light Board decided on April 22 to indefinitely propose a draft policy approved back in December that would have set a new policy on net metering long opposed by solar supporters.

“Article 9 in a non-binding sort of way instructs our legislators to vote in favor of legislation that does not exist and also asks you as Town Meeting members to vote for legislation that you can not read. That’s fairly rare,” said Jones.

Since any state legislation on solar power – none is being proposed currently – won’t be filed until the next legislative year, “it would be prudent to me to allow our Light Board to act. They have been elected to govern … local officials adopting local policy to meet local needs,” said Jones.

After making his “fight to the death” comment, Jones asked residents “to put down our verbal weapons, stop this fight and postpone Article 9” which the Board of Selectmen asked for favorable action.

During question time, Fred Paulsen, Precinct 1, said he would have voted “yes” on an up-or-down amendment that said are we in favor of net metering. “But [this amendment] is not that simple, the language of this resolution is complex and brings in the state level so we ought to work on this locally.”

Anne Mahon, Precinct 4, said that solar companies will not come to Belmont since the current conditions are preserved to be so anti-solar. “11 cents a household a year to support the people with solar. Is that really going to kill you? If it is, call me. I’ll pay the bill.”

Then, suddenly, things got heated. Paul Roberts, Precinct 8, said he wasn’t going to talk to Jones’ amendment but rather “we need a municipal electric company that really represents the values and priorities of this town” while this issue was “foisted upon this town by some ideological leadership on the Municipal Light Advisory Board.”

That’s when Widmer told Roberts he had moved beyond the scope of Jones’ amendment. When Roberts objected, Widmer would not have any more discussion on the matter.

Claus Becker, Precinct 5, questioned the claims by DiOrio that subsidies are provided to solar users. When Widmer asked that he returned to the narrow question before Town Meeting, Becker asked to “please allow the conversation that we’ve been elected to have to proceed.”

Widmer said while there are worthy questions to ask about global warming and solar power, “we are considering a motion for indefinite postponement, and it is incumbent for us to stick to our business.”

Baghdady, in answering a question on when the Light Board would begin debating new rules, said that Belmont Light is currently operating “right now pure net metering” and was going to remain that way until a new policy is adopted.

Despite given an opportunity earlier to speak against the postponement of his article, Wrubel asked to address the meeting.

“The reason that we brought this because at meetings that we … ” Wrubel attempted to say before calls from the members rang out of “point of order” as they felt Wrubel had veered off the subject.

Widmer allowed Wrubel to continue until he made an accusation that one of the Board of Selectmen told solar supporters “that you don’t matter” when drawing up regulations.

Widmer sternly told Wrubel his statements were “inappropriate” and “[T]his kind of accusation, I’m not going to put up with it. So, please, sit down.”

Julie Crocket, Precinct 5, and Phil Thayer, Precinct 6, supported continuing debate to help determine the sentiment of Town Meeting towards solar power.

But Bob McLaughlin, Precinct 2, said he supported Jones’ amendment “because I don’t know what we’re voting on. This is too squishy for me.”

“This has to come into a lot more focus on the vote of this board means anything,” said McLaughlin.

Nearly 70 percent of Town Meeting voted to determinate debate and Jones’ amendment was approved overwhelmingly. 

For Baghdady, it is now up to the Light Board “to come up with a plan that truly meets all the demands from both the solar supporters and Belmont Light. We have this opportunity which I believe we can accomplish.”

Belmont Town Meeting: Night 1, May 4

By 2 Comments

Photo: Belmont Town Meeting.

Welcome to the first night of the 156 annual Belmont Town Meeting, Monday, May 4, 2014, the town’s legislative body in action.

So, what’s in store tonight? Likely we’ll get through the first nine articles in the warrant which includes a non-binding resolution on a solar power referendum (the debate on this could go one and on), a McMansion zoning article, storm water review, and other stuff.

And the meeting is on Belmont time, five minutes late.

7:08 p.m.: We’ve had the invocation, the flags were brought into the auditorium by the Boy and Cub scouts, the Pledge of Allegiance and the singing of the National Anthem by the Belmont High A Cappella. Very nice.

7:15 p.m.: I wonder when the Town Meeting will be comfortable with electronic voting that we don’t need a demonstration. I’m guessing a few more decades.

7:20 p.m.: New and recently re-elected members are given the oath of office by Town Clerk Ellen Cushman.

7:25 p.m.: Town Moderator Mike Widmer telling the members about the new rules; five minutes per speaker, one question and a follow up question, and direct questions through the moderator.

7:28 p.m.: Two proclamations to a pair residents “beloved by Belmont,” said Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady; Anne Allen and Bob Dally.

7:35 p.m.: So we’re off – time to hear the order of the motions. The first nine articles will be debated in May, “hopefully within the first two nights,” said Baghdady.

“I am very upbeat on Belmont,” said Baghdady.

Anne Paulsen is giving an update on the new Underwood Pool. Everything is swimmingly. “Work is going on in a feverous pace” so the pool can be completed by August for a “short season.” So get passes at a discounted rate at the Recreation Department.

7:42 p.m.: Housecleaning articles up first.

7:44 p.m.: Up is Article 3, amending the Storm Water Management and Erosion bylaw to allow more updated rainfall data to apply to the bylaw. But the Conservation Commission uses the old data, which would be a mess as half the town would be using different data. The amendment would allow the ConCom to use the new data, while asking the Board of Selectmen to use the new data set. With a few questions, the article is adopted, with a single no vote. 

7:57 p.m.: Article 6, the citizens petition to control the building of McMansions in the Shaw Estates neighborhood. You can read what the beef of the residents here. Basically, the residents are seeking to limit the height of residential properties to 32 feet to the mid-point. This will sunset on June 30, 2016 unless extended at the next Town Meeting. The people, now called the Belmont Citizens for Responsible Zoning, live in single-family residence, hopes this moratorium will begin a discussion on these “oversized” homes that tower over neighboring homes, crowd out sunlight, and undermines the character of the “Town of Homes.” The current zoning bylaw requires existing homes to obtain a special permit but not for new construction.

Stephen Pinkerton, Pct. 7, said the town faces acceleration oversize construction, especially his neighborhood. Five new McMansions have gone up in the past few years. The before and after pictures of what was there and what is replaced has Town Meeting buzzing, especially the new house on Betts Road currently under construction. “Our neighborhood has been transformed,” said Peg Callahan, who is presenting the petition.

Pinkerton shows that new construction under current bylaw will allow the total height to be 40 feet tall. The 32 feet mid-point “is a compromise” so not to be overwhelming. Callahan said if approved, the new group will meet with Planning Board to construct town-wide limits. A good cheer at the end.

Jim Stanton, Pct. 3, said since the town approved a series of actions in the General Residence district (precinct 3 and 4), one argument against the moratorium is economic harm to seller and developers, but it turns out only the developers reap the great profit when a McMansion is built rather than a more sensible sized house.

Price Armstrong, Pct. 7, asked if the town as a town-wide master plan to come to these goals. He said Cambridge, Lexington and others have such a comprehensive plan. Baghdady said there was one five years ago (but that was killed – tabled – at the 2010 Town Meeting). 

Bob Kennedy, Pct 3, said he lives in Kendell Garden, a neighborhood of small homes, and he was effected when a McMansion was built there. Why would it not be better that the entire town be placed under the neighborhood, because then developers will go to other neighborhoods to beat a town wide change in the bylaw. Selectman Mark Paolillo said you can’t change the amendment but he’s worried about this. Mike Battista, chair of the Planning Board, said even if a town-wide bylaw is not approved, this moratorium can be extended. 

Marty Cohen, Pct. 3, said that this is a “wake-up call.” “Belmont needs a zoning bylaw that’s good for Belmont.”

8:33 p.m.: a voice vote on the article: clearly adopted to the moderator, but why not an electronic vote? And the vote is: 238 to 24.

Wow, only a half an hour to go thorough that amendment.

8:38 p.m.: Next up is Article 7 which is related to the rezoning of General Residences district which passed articles to give special tools to the Planning Board – special permits being one – to make for better housing that is consistent with the neighborhood. Planning Board member Liz Allison said the Board would like another tool. Under the current bylaw, the developer can build a big two-family with a special permit. So this amendment would allow the board to approve a developer with a large lot, 8,000 sq-ft and 90 feet of frontage, to build a pair of single families. 

8:46 p.m.: And the fire alarm goes off! And off we go to the parking lot!

9 p.m.: And we are back! That was delightful. I understand members who left through the music room were serenaded by a chorus. 

Now back to the article; the proponents are looking to “bring back the charm” of the single family (with limits to allow green space between the two buildings) back to the GR zone, said Joseph DeStefano of the Planning Board. 

Questions? Several interesting questions on position of the front door, hypothetical events, and other issues. The question is called and debate is ended. The vote on the article (requires 2/3 vote since it’s a zoning bylaw) is 235 to 10 and the article is adopted.

9:35 p.m.: Moderator Mike Widmer asks if the meeting will want to begin Article 9, the solar power non-binding resolution, debate it for an hour and suspend until Wednesday. Yes, says the meeting.

This is Article 9, the citizens petition on solar power. The Board of Selectmen voted 2-1 to oppose the article. (Jim Williams the lone yes vote). Roger Wrubel, Pct 5, speaks for the petition. Wrubel said this article will bring solar power to a wider audience. This isn’t really about a ballot question, but rather a request for the public utility, Belmont Light, not discriminate against solar owners with special fees. Wrubel explains net metering, required by most utilities which, it turns out, intensifies solar usage. Wrubel said he wants Belmont Light to provide the same retail net metering as 30 of 40 communities. How many Belmont household have solar arrays? 20. Not much. Wrubel said Belmont Light’s policy has punished residents who want to use solar. 

Ralph Jones, Pct 3, introduces Patty DiOrio, of the Belmont Municipal Light Advisory Board – which wrote the draft plan that is no longer being used, who said that the solar advocates will get a subsidy from other users. There is no discrimination to solar users, said DiOrio. This is about keeping local control on how the utility determines how to pay for solar power. 

Jones said its best to wait on the issue so Belmont can create its own standards. He said there are people at Town Meeting who are itching to do battle over the issue. “They want a fight to the death … a fight to the pain.” He proposes this amendment be postpone until a later date to allow emotions to  calm down. 

Fred Paulsen, Pct 1, said its critical Belmont has a strong independent utility. He said with the state task force on solar net metering coming out with a report, the Light Board (it’s made up of the Board of Selectmen) will come up with it’s own standards.

Suddenly the issue is getting people hot under the collar. Paul Roberts, Pct 8, is scolded rather loudly by the moderator for moving beyond the narrow scope of the question. 

Dan Nolan, Pct 2, wonders how long is “indefinite” as in “indefinitely postponed.” Baghdady said the draft buy back plan is off the boards and the Light Board will come up with a plan for Belmont “sooner than later.”

When asked by a speaker if DiOrio has a conflict of interest as she is employed by National Grid, a large utility that supplies Belmont Light with energy, she and Jones said no, this was irrelevant to this measure. For some reason, this is the final straw for Wrubel who goes to the speakers podium and accusing people of “being afraid” to discuss the article and the subject. Calls from the members ring out that Wrubel is “out of order.” Moderator Widmer has heard enough and sends Wrubel back to the bench.

Julie Crocket, Pct. 5, and Phil Thayer, Pct 6, support the measure and requests that the debate continue.

Bob McLaughlin, Pct. 2, questions the entire article, saying it’s far too “squishy” to vote on because it advises the town’s state legislators to vote for legislation that doesn’t exist. 

Then, of all people, Don Mercier, Pct. 8, asked that the questioned be moved, needed a 2/3 majority, it got it. Town Meeting is not in a mood to spend the rest of the night and Wednesday in a debating tournament. Article 9 is voted down by a healthy margin.

10:20 p.m.: Town Meeting will reconvene on Wednesday, May 6.

As Town Delays Policy, Town Meeting Considers Solar Power Resolution

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Solar panels.

Just two weeks after the Belmont Light Board – made up of the Belmont Board of Selectmen – decided to delayed the start of a payment plan for residents who use solar power, Town Meeting will debate placing a non-binding resolution on the town ballot to ask if the town should support as policy a higher subsidy to homeowners who choose the solar route.

While Sami Baghdady, the chair of the Light Board and the Selectmen, said the delay was so legal language could be clarified in the documents homeowners are required to sign, he did not dismiss the possibility the Light Board – which oversees Belmont Light, the municipal electric utility – could lead to a change in the Residential Rate APV, the new set of rates for customers who use solar panels to generate electricity which was approved in December. 

“At this point, it’s a delay. May it result in a re-evalutation of the policy? I think it might,” said Baghdady after a Selectmen’s meeting on Monday, April 27. 

The Light Board OK’d the postponement after several of the 18 residents who are entitled to participate in Belmont Light’s new program voiced concerns on understanding the legal language in the agreement including a very strong indemnity provision that needed to be signed and returned by April 24. 

“So when [the board] met (on April 22), we raised several questions regarding the packet that went out to residents that were still unresolved. So we agreed to delay the implementation. Concurrent with that, so that necessitated a delay in the filing [by Belmont Light] to the Massachusetts Department of Utilities,” said Baghdady. 

With the new residential rate delayed, Town Meeting will likely take up on the first night of the annual meeting, Monday, May 4, a citizen’s petition from a group of solar power advocates seeking members approval to place a non-binding referendum to gauge the community’s support for either the newly-created buy back pricing program or one which provides a greater payback to households using solar energy. 

Under the newly-delayed plan – which took nearly two years and sometimes contentious debates between advocates and the Municipal Light Advisory Board which drew up the blueprint – residents who install solar power would pay the standard monthly fee every household pays to be hooked up to the Belmont Light system, and a new monthly charge of about $14 for installed capacity.

The new plan also reduces the money homeowners receives as a credit for energy Belmont Light “buys back” when the solar system is generating excess energy as the utility pays for electricity over the course of the entire month, without crediting the homeowner if the electricity is generated during peak-times and how much greenhouse gas emissions they are savings.  

Solar advocates contend they should receive additional credits, (or as the utility calls subsidies) for a myriad of energy and pollution savings.

While the debate in Belmont continues, a state task force on net metering and solar power issued its own report on April 30 concluding that it did did “not support raising the net metering caps in the short term absent a long term sustainable solution.”

“Rather, we believe it is extremely important that any adjustments to the caps be accompanied by meaningful changes to the mix of incentives and proper consideration of the role of the ratepayers,” it read.

A Week of Road Closures, Parking Restrictions Set During Golf Tourney

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The map of street closures set for June during a golf event in Belmont.

A popular travel link between Route 2 and Belmont will be closed for nearly a week in early June and residents living close to Belmont Country Club will have daytime parking restrictions in their neighborhoods while a major golf tournament takes place, according to Belmont Police.

During the Professional Golf Association (PGA) Tour’s Constellation Senior Players Championship, taking place at Belmont Country Club next month, initial plans call for Winter Street from Route 2 to Marsh Street to be closed during the day to through traffic from Tuesday, June 9, through Sunday, June 14, 2015, according to Belmont’s Assistant Chief James MacIsaac.

Residents should also expect daytime parking restrictions in the neighborhoods abutting the club.

These are initial plans that still need to be finalized, said MacIsaac. 

The news comes a few weeks since the PGA initiated, then rejected using Rock Meadow Conservation Land for up to 1,000 parking spaces. Currently, the PGA acquired parking, outside of Belmont, for employees and spectators who will be transported by shuttle bus from parking areas to the club. 

Belmont Police will host a public meeting at 7 p.m. on May 14, in the Wadsworth Room of the Belmont Hill School Athletic Center. This meeting will provide residents with information pertaining to traffic and parking plans. The meeting will also provide residents with the opportunity to ask questions to law enforcement.

Those interested in obtaining future announcements on the PGA’s event at Belmont Country Club should follow the police and town’s social media accounts and websites.

New Belmont Center Parking Pricing Plan Begins May 1

By 1 Comment

Photo: The new commuter parking spaces along Royal Road.

Postponed three months due to the record snow fall, a new parking pricing scheme for Belmont Center’s parking lot and along a street popular with commuters begins Friday, May 1. 

The plan includes the new fee structure for residents and shoppers using the municipal parking lot on Claflin Street and an attempt to monetize the vast number of commuters who have parked on Belmont streets for nothing, or close to it, for decades.

At Belmont Center’s main parking lot, the daily rate is being upped from $3 to $5. Shoppers will now pay a buck an hour to park there. 

In addition to the hourly and daily fees jumps in Belmont Center, the town created 10 weekday parking spots along Royal Road adjacent to the MBTA’s Belmont commuter rail station in addition to spaces in the Claflin St. lot reserved for commuter pass holders.

Those monthly passes are going for $90 a pop, an increase of $30.

Many Belmont businesses owners were critical of the blueprint when it was approved in December, noting the hardship for many part-time employees. The Belmont Center Business Association suggested cutting the increases to employees and shoppers while pushing more of the costs onto commuters.

Belmont officials noted the new rates were approved by the town’s parking advisory group, and were vital to allow the parking system to pay its own way. 

Belmont Town Treasurer Floyd Carman, said rates have been kept steady since January 2009 while the demand for parking spots is outstripping supply.

“Belmont parking is at a premium. We are not like other towns that either has the space for big lots or a lot of industry that can subsidize parking,” said Carman. “Belmont does not have that luxury; We have a limited number of parking spaces. That’s the facts.”

White Knight to the Rescue: Cushing Village Partnering with Cambridge Firm

By 1 Comment

Photo: Cushing Village on the Chinese-language website, Jei Wi. 

After more than 21 months since the town approved its construction, the developer of the multi-use Cushing Village project has apparently found his “White Knight” to help rescue the 167,000 square foot project that has been floundering since 2013. 

In a press release dated April 27, Cushing Village’s developer, Smith Legacy Partners said Cambridge-based Urban Spaces would become its “development partner” in constructing the three-building complex comprising 115 apartments, about 36,000 square feet of retail/commercial space and a garage complex with 230 parking spaces. 

Urban Spaces’ “development expertise will help to ensure that the vision we have for the Cushing Village project becomes a reality,” said Chris Starr, the managing partner of Smith Legacy Partners located in Acton.

Movement on the long-stalled project at the corner of Trapelo Road and Common Street was met with approval from town officials.

“We welcome any news suggesting that the Cushing Village project is progressing,” said Sami Baghdady, chair of the Belmont Board of Selectmen. Baghdady was chair of the Planning Board, which spent nearly 18 months reviewing Starr’s plans for the project before approving the development plans in July 2013. 

Reports have yet to reveal the exact relationship between Starr and Urban Spaces, in terms of an equity stake, or which party has the controlling interest currently or in the future. In Urban Spaces’ past developments, the still young firm – it was founded in 2005 and completed its first major development in 2010 – has a history of continuing to hold onto properties once they are completed. 

“Unlike most developers, who are there to get projects built and move on, we manage all of our own properties,” said Urban Spaces’ Vice President of Operations Jeff Hirsch.

“We’re in it for the long haul,” Hirsch said in an article in the trade journal Construction Now.

The press release announcing the partnership said Urban Spaces “acquires, develops, and manages high-end residential properties in close proximity to urban centers.” 

Town officials are not aware of the partnership arrangement between Starr and Urban Spaces. 

“I am not aware of the nature of Urban Spaces’ participation in the project, but I am sure we will learn more before the developer purchases the Cushing Square parking lot property from the town,” said Baghdady. 

The initial step forward to begin construction of the complex will be the sale of the municipal parking lot adjacent to Trapelo and Williston roads by the town to the partnership for $850,000. That sale will be completed once the new team meets a series of provisions in the development agreement, once of which is identifying the development’s financing. 

The town can expect to receive about $1.5 million in the parking lot sale and fees and permit costs. 

But despite the announcement, nothing has taken place between the partners and the town with no firm date for the beginning of construction, according to Glenn Clancy, the town’s director of Community Development. 

The partnership announcement appears to bring an end to a tumultuous 21 months for Starr – who personally sued each of the Board of Selectmen in 2010 in a dispute over the municipal parking lot – as proclamations to the town of quick start on the project quickly turned into a series of delays and broken promises. 

Stalled by financing

In January 2014, Starr made public statements that construction would begin in the late winter or the early summer with the first stores opening by the spring of 2015. Yet the next time the development team was before town officials was in March 2014 when Starr’s representatives  negotiated with the Board of Selectmen a month-to-month extension to purchase the Trapelo Road  municipal parking lot by paying a $20,000 monthly non-refundable fee.

So far, Smith Legacy has sent nearly a quarter of a million dollars into town coffers. This month, the fee is scheduled to increase to $30,000. 

Discussion within the local business circles indicated that Starr – whose previous development experience has been building a small retail development in his hometown – was finding it difficult finding the necessary development financing to come before the town to purchase the parking lot. 

In addition, Starr had parted ways with his previous development partner, Porter Square’s Oaktree Development before finalizing the building rights with the Planning Board, which many business insiders said only made it more difficult finding a financial backer.

By August 2014, Starr hired Boston Realty Advisors, a commercial deal maker, offering up Cushing Village as a “pre-sale or joint venture development opportunity.”

By the beginning of 2015, the development showed up on the leading real estate website in China, JuWai.com, where it was seeking investors willing to pay up to $8 million to become a financial partner.

While the development stalled, the project lost an opportunity to lease the anchor retail space to a grocery store Starr has longed sought, when Foodie’s Urban Market decided to rent about 30,000 square-feet in the former Macy’s site in Belmont Center. 

It appeared activity was about to occur at the development with the news that the popular laundromat E-Z Duz It at the corner of Horne Road and Common Street was closing on April 30. 

What Urban Spaces brings to the partnership is just about everything needed to start, complete and run the development. The firm, founded by Paul Ognibene (who incidentally is the chair of the Cohasset School Committee), has experience developing Cushing Village-like projects. A recently completed building is a commercial development at 159 First Street in Cambridge’s Kendall Square, totaling 126,000 square feet housing 115 apartments with an underground parking garage and ground floor retail.

Screen Shot 2015-04-29 at 8.51.54 AM

159 First Street, Cambridge, built by Urban Spaces.

Another, currently being planned on the Brighton and Brookline line on Washington Street, would include 130 units on five floors, first-floor retail space with 80 underground parking spaces. In that project, Urban Space acquired a 99-year lease on the property. 

Urban Space is also very active in the property management field and has financed projects it builds such as 7 Cameron Ave. in North Cambridge, and 30 Haven St. in Reading, built in 2012.

Coincidently, Urban Spaces partnered with Oaktree Development in the Reading development. 

“We’re in a big growth stage,” Urban Spaces’ Hirsch said in the Construction Now article.

“We’ve tripled in size in the last year and a half, and our property management business has quadrupled. We have been able to bring in some amazingly talented people with the same core values towards value, quality, and plain old hard work,” he said.