Town Council - Regular Meeting

This one works.

Thank you.

Okay, I think we've sorted out a mic issue and share mics throughout this night. Athena, are we ready to record? Yes, we're recording now. Okay, thank you. Good evening, thank you for your patience. Seeing a presence of a quorum, I am calling this September 14th, 2026 regular meeting of the town council to order at 6.38 PM. Please be advised that this meeting is being held in person and that the remote access option for members of the public is provided as a courtesy only. In the event of technology issues with the remote connection, the meeting will continue in person as scheduled as long as there is a quorum of the council present in the town room or through technological means. Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025 extended through June 30, 2027, the ability of public bodies to meet without a quorum of the council physically present at a meeting location, although a quorum of the council is present in the town room. This meeting is being recorded and is accessible in real time via Zoom, by phone, and is a live broadcast on Amherst Media Channel 9 and at amherstmedia.org. At this time, I'll call upon each counselor by the name they have indicated that they would like to be addressed. This will indicate that we can hear you and you can hear us. Counselor Brevik. Here. Counselor Cano-Martin.

Here.

Andy Churchill.

Here.

Ana Devongafieh. Here. Lynn Griesemer. Present. Don't pull too far. Mandy Johanicki is present. Counselor Lord. Present. Sam McLeod.

Present.

Pam Ernie. Here. Councillor Ryan. Present. Cathy Shane. Here. Jennifer Taub. Here. And Councillor Walker, I believe, is going to be absent. If councillors have technical issues, please let the council clerk know or call a point of personal privilege. There will be one public comment period during general public comment. If you are in the town room, please sign up with the council clerk to make public comment. If you are attending remotely, I will ask for you to raise your hand in the Zoom application when we reach the time for public comment. With that, the announcements are on the agenda and we have no hearings, which does bring us to public comment. Anyone wishing to make public comment who is attending remotely, please raise your hand in the Zoom application. If you are present in the town room and have not yet signed up with the council clerk, please do so now. Residents are welcome to make public comments on matters within the jurisdiction of the town council. The council will not engage in a dialogue or comment on a matter raised during the general public comment. Public comments are not reflective of the opinions of the town council. The First Amendment broadly protects individuals rights to address the government, to speak and to express themselves, including their right to say hateful and offensive things. I am generally unable to shut those commenters down under the First Amendment to the US Constitution unless their level of speech falls within an exception articulated by the courts, such as fighting words, true threats to a particular individual, harassment of a particular individual, or incitement of imminent lawless activity. If a question exists as to whether a particular speaker is engaging in unprotected speech, I must defer to the principle of freedom of speech. There are zero hands raised on Zoom of people who wish to make public comment, although now it became one. How many people in the town room have signed up to make public comment? Six. Six. So we have seven. So at this time, each commenter will have three minutes to make their public comment. We will start with the one on zoom and then move to everyone in the town room. So Eric Bach Rock, please unmute yourself, state your name and where you live and make your public comment.

Um, Thank you very much for giving me the time to speak to you. My name is Eric Bachrach. I live at 277 Schutzberry Road. I'm speaking on behalf of Smart Soil Amherst to address a section of the clean energy bylaw that we feel is unfair to people who are residents of the town who who derive their water excuse me eric could you speak a little louder so that we can hear you a little more clearly in the town room sure i'll do my best whoops thank you um of course i'm trying to find my whoops I'm speaking on behalf of Smart Solar Amherst and we are concerned particularly about a section of the clean energy bylaw which was drafted and is being discussed tonight, the section that covers the no disturbance area, the differential distance between those on public water supply systems and those that are like us in the northeast of Amherst on well water. The proposed clean energy bylaw, which includes in its dimensional standard section, paragraph 18.08.013, clearly disadvantages and potentially harms town residents who rely exclusively on drinking water derived from private well systems. This paragraph limits the no disturbance area to 100 feet from solar photovoltaic installation development. The next paragraph, 18.08.014, extends the no disturbance area for those people on public water supply to 200 feet or an additional 100 feet of protection from the SPI. Five percent of town residents depend on water from wells and almost all these residents live in the northeast section of town. This area of town is also the only section of Amherst that has sufficient undeveloped available land to entice industrial scale solar to Amherst. So what are we saying as we codify protections that clearly make the Northeast section of Amherst less protected? This section of Amherst has the greatest potential for SPI development with the fewer restrictions. Residents in the in the in the Shutesbury Road area have fought for over six years to prevent the wholesale clear cutting of neighborhood forest land for industrial scale solar for many reasons, not the least. not the least of which is due to the large scale presence of wetlands in the neighborhood. Wetlands are essential in assisting in the regeneration and processing of groundwater, which in turn feeds our local aquifers and provides our drinking water.

Please wrap up your comments, Eric.

Pardon me?

Your three minutes has expired, so please wrap up your comments.

Without groundwater supplies, our water will disappear and make our homes uninhabitable. At a meeting of Amherst Water Supply Protection Committee in January 2021, one of our Shrewsbury Road neighbors asked about- Eric, you need to wrap them up. Aquifer compromise. And we asked the town manager to appoint someone on the solar bylaw crafting group- Eric, you really do need to wrap up. and the Health Department declined. We feel that the shorter distance- Again, Eric, your time is up and you need to wrap up your comments.

This appears to be discriminatory and puts those 5% of the town residents- Eric, I'm going to keep saying this because you're being disrespectful to the other members of the public that will only get three minutes. Please wrap up your comments.

Thank you very much. I'm finished.

Thank you, Eric. Athena.

I'm at Esfahani.

Please come on up, state your name and where you live and make your comment.

Thank you. My name is Ahmad Esfahani. I'm a resident of Greenfield and a former employee of the town of Amherst. I'm here to ask the Amherst City Council to consider adopting a resolution condemning the ongoing war against Iran and calling for an immediate end to the violence, the protection of civilians, and a diplomatic path toward peace. Communities throughout this region have recognized that local governments have a moral voice when civilians are being killed and communities are being destroyed by war. Typically concerning Gaza or Palestine, towns like Amherst have passed resolutions calling for sea fires, humanitarian assistance, protection of civilians, and an end to policies that perpetuate violence. To my knowledge, Oakland, California in June actually passed a resolution titled Condemning the War on Iran. I believe Amherst should consider doing the same. Condemning this war, to be clear, does not mean supporting or condemning any particular government or group. It is entirely possible to disagree with the government of Iran and also oppose the bombing of Iranian cities and the killing of Iranian civilians. I therefore ask the Amherst City Council to consider a resolution calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and a sustained ceasefire in Iran, the protection of civilians and unrestricted humanitarian assistance, independent investigation of credible allegations of violations of international humanitarian law and possible war crimes, A commitment to diplomacy and negotiations rather than further military escalation. And finally, support for members of the Amherst community who are affected by this conflict. To conclude, let me just say that Amherst cannot end this war by itself, but it can make a statement about what it believes in. Thank you.

Thank you, Akman, for your comments tonight. Athena?

There's another person on Zoom.

We're going to take that person at the end of the six in town room. Doug, please come on up, state your name and where you live and make your comment.

My name is Doug Marshall. I live at 64 Eames Avenue. I'm here as a private citizen, although my comments are informed from my role as the chair of the planning board. I understand that Councilor Griezmer either has or will offer tonight two motions to amend Section 18.08 of the proposed Article 18 Clean Energy By-law. Motion one will propose increasing the no-disturbance distance from solar photovoltaic installations, SPIs for short, to private wells from 100 feet to 200 feet. consistent with the requirement for public water supplies. I strongly urge the Council to reject Motion 1. While I question the need for Motion 2, it would have a much lesser negative impact on the potential for solar energy production in Amherst. By increasing the no-disturbance distance from four SBIs to private wells from 100 to 200 feet, Motion 1 could reduce the efficiency of land use for an SBI, especially for the scale of parcels that are typical of those in this town. I fear that it would at best increase local sustainable energy costs, and at worst, render many potential SPIs economically infeasible. During their joint public meetings preparing the draft of this bylaw, Planning Board and CRC found that current generations of photovoltaic panels do not leach their component materials and consequently do not pose a threat of contamination to the soil under them. and rainwater running off of them. In addition, no PFAS containing panels are on the market. The primary threat from construction and operation of SPIs come from surface erosion and sediment runoff due to land clearance. Consequently, the threat to public water supply reservoirs is greater than to subsurface wells, and the two categories of water supply can appropriately be treated differently. The required distance from an on-site septic system to a private well is 100 feet. There are relatively few public water supply locations in Amherst, whereas there are many private wells, many of which are at properties adjacent to land that may be appropriate for SPIs. No other land uses, including some which might pose greater health risks, are subject to the types of no disturbance distance requirements that are proposed in this bylaw for SPIs. I believe that this town will best set itself up for the future by leaving the current no disturbance distance for SPIs to private wells at 100 feet. There is no demonstrable public benefit to increasing this distance. And doing so will reduce our ability to slow climate change through local sustainable energy production. Please do not approve motion one.

Thank you for your comments, Doug. Sam Bedry. Sam, please come on up, state your name and where you live, and make your comment.

Cool. This will be like a classic debate, what have yous. I was here two months ago, and yeah, we have to bring someone.

Can you please state your name? Oh, I'm sorry.

I'm Sam Badry. I'm at Hampshire College, and there's plenty of AV people over there who could come here to help you all with this. I'm sorry. I'm not that person. But I will relay the message. okay so good evening um speak tonight dip three candidate um i'm also semi a liaison for this representative of grassroot coalition of the Amherst residents. As you convene for the second read of the final vote on this thing that was just mentioned, the council must take a critical structural pause. We recognize that the Commonwealth is aggressively compelling municipalities to align local codes with state-mandated clean energy deadlines. However, the state's mandate does not require that this council to surrender its local regulatory authority or blindly open our agricultural fields to predatory Corporate enclosure. If the state forces compliance, it is the council's explicit duty to pass the most protective ironclad standards allowed under the law. We must look directly at the market data. The recent insolvency and sudden collapse of the second largest solar installer of the Commonwealth proves that the speculative commercial solar market is highly volatile. Ripping up our master plan to accommodate unstable energy developers is an existential risk to our municipal stability. I don't think the planning board ever did a wind, a microturbine read, so, you know. If he's concerned about that, he can look into that or hydropower. Furthermore, from a rigorous system of ecology perspective, prime agricultural topsoil is a non-renewable resource.

It's a non-renewable resource.

We can only farm here in Massachusetts. One needs to look at the Goulet farm situation. I know it's Hadley, but look what they've done. No one looks at that at that storage unit was like that was a good idea or as they're scraping away the soil to put in the solar panels there. That. That took 10,000 years of a glacial lake to form it's irreversibly done under the time okay so. If you're going to do this, you must explicitly mandate exclusive use of low impact earth screw piles to minimize subsurface structural hydrological disruption. Unfortunately, you can't do that without bringing big machinery that impacts it in the process, but that is the best way to do it. So ultimately, if you go through with this, the town can invoke 8.3 and 8.4. We don't want brinksmanship. We want to work together. If this town wants a real resolution to its clean water, tax revenue, municipal waste management crisis, please look to the horizon. Please consider partnering with our grassroots coalition to implement some sort of biochar facility at Hampshire College through UMass pilot money. And bring DPW to Hampshire. Take the library. You know, and ultimately, we're going to pass zoning laws for tiny homes, and that's what's going to go on Hampshire, not the plan that you have.

Thank you, Sam, for your comments tonight. Athena?

Larry Steinhauser.

Larry, please come on up, state your name and where you live, and make your comments.

My name is Larry Steinhauser. I live at 40 Bridal Path in Amherst, Massachusetts. On a lighter note, and not that war, water and environment aren't super important, but on a day-to-day basis, pickleball in Amherst is a problem. and would really appreciate just a heightened awareness and maybe some support to our town recreation department to help. It's the fastest growing sport. A lot of you, maybe you play, maybe you don't. It's especially relevant for older adults and it's nice to see seniors and older adults, elders get active. It is a very much an intergenerational sport. On a recent few weeks back, there were people between the ages of eight and 75, about 20 of us playing at the Mill River Park. About five years ago, there was approximately five years ago, there was money passed to build new courts, not for lack of effort, but it's not successful yet. Meanwhile, all the towns around us like Northampton, Belcher Town, South Hadley, they've got beautiful new courts. They're extensively used. We desperately need that as the end goal. But what I'm asking for today is an understanding that it's great exercise, that it is really good for eye-hand coordination. It is great for reaction time and balance, things that are relevant, keeping older adults healthy. It's super good for socialization and laughter, and that's an issue. Loneliness, solo aging, it's a problem in our country and even in our town. So Mill River in North Amherst is the only location with Hampshire College's closure. It's a major issue. Bay Road courts were heavily used. It's funneling into this little old two tennis courts. One has lines painted on it. The other does not. I'm simply asking, please. paint the lines on the second court. So on the days that we're there with like 16, 18 of us, only eight are playing on the court with lines and the others are twiddling their thumbs watching. The other court sits empty about nine out of every 10 visits. And I appreciate, I've had good conversations with the rec department, great people. But I can't get them beyond thinking that tennis players, who I love, have to have courts with no lines. That's not true. Division I UMass indoor tennis is at the Hampshire College courts with pickleball lines on the courts. So that just doesn't fly. Please consider getting the lines on the other court so we can double our pleasure and have flexibility. The tennis players can play if they come. The pickleball players can play if nobody's on the court. And we ultimately really hope you'll continue to work on building the brand new courts that were promised five years ago. It would be really, really great. Thank you.

Thank you, Larry, for your comments tonight. Evan Naismith. Evan, please come on up. State your name and where you live and make your comments.

good evening counselors my name is evan a smith i'm a resident of district 5. i want to talk tonight about how the town treats its students so the u.s census counts students as amherst residents and federal dollars follow the state counts them in our chapter 90 money and block grants rise accordingly including students who live on campus our charter counts them which is why our district maps look the way they do and this council counts them at this microphone so a student who signs up gets the same three minutes that i'm using right now But when we get to housing, we stop counting students as residents. We all know that UMass is top five nationwide at providing housing. Another way of putting that is that the town of Amherst is bottom five in providing safe, affordable housing for its student residents. Over the last decade, State College Pennsylvania permitted five times as many apartments as we have. So while Penn State students live in safe, affordable apartments, UMass students live in overpriced residential basements. Developers didn't make that choice. The town meeting did. To make matters worse, it seems like every year someone on the planning board comes up with a scheme to squeeze students out of the housing market. They've tried lot line restrictions, owner occupancy requirements, and exemptions from state housing laws. Thankfully, these cruel tricks rarely work. KP Law has repeatedly written us memos saying, actually, that's housing discrimination. Or the state replies, yes, actually, the regulations do apply to Amherst. But these proposals send a clear message to students. You're not our preferred constituents. We wish you lived somewhere else. On campus, Holyoke, wherever. Just not here. But imagine an alternate universe in which Amherst takes pride in approving affordable housing for students. Why aren't we trying to get them to register to vote? Why don't we offer them town hall internships? There is an alternate universe in which we have actually earned a generous pilot payment. By the way, if you want a student intern, reach out to UMass Women in Leadership at uwill.umass.edu. UWIL. So here's my specific ask. Please remind your planning board members that they represent both year round residents and student residents. We don't need to prioritize the interests of students, but we do have a duty to provide them with equal representation. And please pay attention to the Human Rights Commission meeting on Wednesday. They'll be discussing the ethical concerns with Amherst four plus unrelated individuals bylaw, which uses marital status to target student residents. I hope they reach the same conclusion that I do. It's discriminatory and has no place in modern-day Amherst. Thank you.

Thank you, Evan, for your comments tonight. Athena?

Marian Hoffman Foreman?

Marian, please come on up, state your name and where you live, and make your comment.

Well, Marian Hoffman Foreman, 19 The Hollow. I don't have a prepared speech. I was just going to reiterate what Larry said. We really need lines painted on the tennis court next to us so that we don't have 15 people waiting to play. It's not a big ask, but we would really appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mary, for your comments tonight. Athena, are there anyone else?

No, that's the end of the register.

So Bruce Colden, please unmute yourself, state your name and where you live and make your comment.

Bruce Coldham. I live in Pine Street in North Amherst. Like Doug, I'm here as a private citizen, Doug Marshall that is, but I am informed by a considerable number of meetings of the planning board and the CRC in which we deliberated on the clean energy bylaw and it's that motion one that is proposed to amend what was transferred initially to the council that concerns me like Doug I urge you to vote this amendment down I would state pretty much everything that Doug said but I won't I've written it in a submission to you but I will take a moment to say that it's important to recognize that when you double the radius from 100 to 200 feet, you are quadrupling the amount of land that is essentially sterilized or removed from the ability to place arrays. So that's a considerable amount. If you have a well on the perimeter of the site, a parcel, at 100 feet, it sterilizes 0.3 acres. Doubling that to 200 feet, You've got 1.4 acres has taken out. So in a parcel that's five acres, which is a guess at what the plausible size of parcels might be in the outer part of town where these developments might take place, because, you know, these are big, but they're not huge potential solar developments. That's that's 30% of the area that's taken out and that's enough to render a project unfeasible. So this has the hallmark of an amendment which is unintentionally or otherwise going to restrict the likelihood that we will be able to have PVs in town in the way which we are intended by this bylaw. Finally, I've spent a considerable amount of my professional architectural life dealing with high performance buildings, and quite a few of them, we have put PV systems on the roof. And in a number of them, we have collected drinking water off of those PVs with all regulatory and research intelligence supportive of that. So there is absolutely no connection between water contamination and photovoltaic panels, none at all. You can drink the water often. So when you want to put double the distance of a separation that recognizes that PV panels are twice as bad as a septic system leach field, you can see why it is rather frustrating and borderline infuriating when I read that the thought is to double this distance. Please do not. Please reject this amendment. Thank you.

Thank you, Bruce, for your comments tonight. Zain Saleem, please unmute yourself, state your name and where you live, and make your comment.

Hello, can people hear me?

Yes, we can.

Okay, so I'm Zan Saleem and I live in Northampton, but I recently graduated from Hampshire College. I graduated in May of this year and I would like to suggest that the town impose a temporary moratorium on the rezoning of the Hampshire College campus. Ideally, at least a year-long moratorium. I say this because I know that the town is currently undertaking a rezoning study. But at the July 21st information session convened by the town of Amherst about the rezoning study, somebody, I'm pretty sure it was Paul Bockelman, said that the rezoning study is occurring at a, quote, unquote, warp speed. And I find it quite alarming that the rezoning study is occurring at warp speed because it means that there's an unusually short amount of time to democratically deliberate rezoning proposals. And if the rezoning proposals are indeed ready by January 2027, as was the proposed or the protected timeline stated at the July 21st information session then that's simply not enough time and that's for four months from now and I was also and I and many others who were in attendance at that information session were also alarmed by the by the rather undemocratic nature of the meeting, because to name just one example, the meeting ended early with the hosts claiming that all the questions which they were able to answer had been answered, but some participants Some of us participants, we knew each other, and so we shared with each other the questions we had asked at that information session. And a lot of them were questions that the town manager and the planning board director and the consultants present did not answer, even though they could have answered. So I just think that we need more time to discuss the rezoning of the campus. I'm not against the eventual rezoning of the campus. I just think that a moratorium of at least one year is needed so that we have more time to deliberate how the campus should be rezoned. Thank you.

Thank you, Zan, for your comments tonight. That concludes public comment. We will move on to the consent agenda. The following items were selected because they were considered to be routine and it was reasonable to expect they would pass with no controversy. To remove an item from the consent agenda for discussion later in the meeting, ask that it be removed when the president lists the consent agenda items. The request to remove an item from the consent agenda does not require a second. So the motion is to move the following items and the printed motions there under and approve those items as a single unit. 6A, adoption of the 2026 International Myotonic Dystrophy Awareness Day Proclamation. Waiver of Town Council Rules of Procedure Rule 8.6 for town manager appointments. Item 9A, 1 to 6, approval of town manager appointments to the Community Preservation Act Committee, Cultural Council, Department of Public Works Building Committee, Energy and Climate Action Committee, Historical Commission, and Transportation and Parking Commission. 11A, approval of August 17, 2026 regular meeting and public forum minutes. And 11B, approval of the August 31, 2026 work session minutes. Are there any requests to remove items from consent? Seeing no hands, is there a second to the motion to the consent agenda?

Griesemer second.

Lynn Griesemer has seconded that motion. We will move to the roll call vote, because we have one member not in the town room tonight. We start with Sam McLeod.

Aye.

Pam Rooney. Yes. Counselor Ryan. Kathy Shane? Yes. Jennifer Taub? Yes. Counselor Walker is absent. Counselor Brevik? Yes. Counselor Ken O'Martin?

Yes.

Andy Churchill?

Yes.

Ana de Van Gogh? Aye. Lynn Griesemer? Aye. Mandy Johanicki is aye. Counselor Lord? Aye. That is unanimous 12 to 0 in support of consent. We move on to resolutions and proclamations. I'm going to recognize Ana de Van Gogh at this time.

Anna was grabbing a microphone and so doesn't have the right thing pulled up. I'm sorry. Could you give me 10 seconds?

Sure. Sorry. We also have the community sponsor for this proclamation in the audience, Jane Mayers, and I'm going to sign them tonight.

Yeah, I want to thank Jane for all of her work on this and all of the efforts that came out of getting this on our radar and getting it passed. Thank you so much for your advocacy. I will read the last bit of this proclamation. Ahem. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that we, the Amherst Town Council, do hereby recognize September 15th, 2026 as International Myotonic Dystrophy Awareness Day. Be it further proclaimed that we, the Amherst Town Council, recognize the seriousness of myotonic dystrophy and support the goals and ideals of International Myotonic Dystrophy Awareness Day. which include committing to promoting and advancing the health, well-being, and inherent dignity of all children and adults with myotonic dystrophy and supporting the advancement of scientific and medical myotonic dystrophy research, fostering biopharmaceutical innovation that will lead to treatments and eventually a cure for myotonic dystrophy. advancing programs and policies that assist individuals living with myotonic dystrophy and the caregivers of such individuals, and encouraging awareness and education of myotonic dystrophy for patients, caregivers, clinicians, and researchers. I also just want to add, I would encourage everyone to read the full proclamation, especially if you have not heard of myotonic dystrophy before. This was something that was new to me when I received the request for this proclamation. And having learned a lot, I am very, very strongly backing this proclamation. It's deeply important. Thank you. Thank you.

I've got the signed copies here with all the cords going in front of the council dais. I'm going to hand these to Ana to hand to Jane. Thank you for coming tonight, Jane. We are going to move on to presentations and discussions. So last week we received an email from the regional school committee chair setting a date for a four towns meeting in about a week and just under two weeks now, September 21st. And he indicated in that email that the topic would be the Amherst Pelham Regional School District Agreement and priorities for the towns, various towns, and just a general discussion on amending that agreement. And since that was before our deadline, I thought it would be nice if I could myself and Councillor Ken O'Martin, who are the ones that speak at the four towns could hear from councillors about their thoughts on any amendments to the regional agreement, remind you to send your thoughts to us so that in the initial request to state our priorities, we're not taking any votes tonight. When we make the presentation, we will say this is what we heard from councillors, not that we voted these specifically. But I would love to, and I'm sure Councillor Ken O'Martin would love to hear thoughts on priorities for amending the regional agreement as that conversation opens. So I'm going to open the floor to those who have thoughts. I'm hoping we can do this fairly efficiently in about 30 minutes or less because we are not taking any votes and it is the beginning of a conversation and it's that will be truly begin on september 26th at the four towns meeting um so we will start with uh andy churchill it's not so much a question um a suggestion as a question do you what's where's this where's this coming from i mean it

It's coming from some of the other towns that want to change things. Are there things that you've heard of that they're looking to change, or is this just sort of a housekeeping thing to see if there's anything that we want to work on?

I can take a stab at that. It is just... Slightly informed speculation is what I would say. There has been talk for a while. Well, the town council has actually been requesting for the last eight years, amendment of the regional agreement to reflect our new form of government at a minimum. So that has been requested regularly at four towns meetings by representatives of the town council, because right now the regional agreement only refers to select boards and town meetings, which is not what we have. So that's one of the first things we've been asking, but we've heard it particularly, I think the town meet the four towns meeting last year, but maybe the year before that the state DESE has indicated to the superintendent that some of the agreement might be out of compliance with current state law because it is so old. and that it really should be updated to reflect current state law. And so I think part of this is a reflection of that conversation maybe that the superintendent has had with DESE folk. Beyond that, there's, I think, been various requests three of the four towns have adopted one amendment that we are holding off on the finance committee recommended waiting on an amendment, voting on an amendment that was recently put forward from the regional school committee. So I think there's just been various conversations throughout that say, you know, this is a pretty old agreement. Various towns are looking for some amendments. Let's have a more broad conversation. Kathy.

Andy, my recollection and also watching regional start to talk about this is similar to Mandy that they heard. What's interesting is they heard it's out of compliance, but not what's out of compliance. There are several pieces, including and it affects the other three towns more than us in terms of membership. There are rules on how many you can have. And I believe Pelham has one too many given membership. the number of children in the schools so what i would i can't make this meeting so i will also write up what i'm going to say and then people can figure out what they want to do with it we wrote a piece in the finance committee report that should the region the other three towns decide that they're willing to be a sixth through eighth grade middle school that there could be provisions in the regional agreement on how the assessment method would work you know would it work related to the number of kids you have in and there'd be another section that not all towns have to come in that it's at their discretion whether they should they want to join their sixth grade they can so if the other three towns want to stay out and there are some there aren't very many regional schools where not all towns are in for all grades in the region, that they may come in just for the high school and not for the middle school. There aren't very many of them. And DESE, there was a ruling when we thought, Amherst thought that was what was gonna happen. It was going to be a real sixth, I want to say a real sixth or eighth, that you could be taking music and art and language classes together, you know, that the periods would be sequenced and music. So Desi, that director then said, no, we're not going to approve those anymore. We don't like them. You know, if all hands aren't in. then not but that director has changed and so i wanted in the discussion was could we get some of the other towns willing to go with us to desi to show why it's an advantage to all of us it's not just an advantage to amherst so that's my big one both on a allowing it how the assessment method would work Then there is the other piece where we already sort of, I guess, fixed it, but the rental space was $100 per year, and that's gone by the wayside. I have no idea what rent we finally agreed on for, I assume there's a dollar number, but there was no, for our sixth grade, we're paying rent, and we're paying a share of visas. And then the last thing, I'm not sure it's in, I just have to read it, And where are we in compliance? We're in an almost statutory method, but then we do an average of five years rather than let it... I don't know whether anywhere in the regional agreement says an average of five years, even though we've been doing that. And Desi said, anytime we want to change it, we have to change it before December, that the regional agreement would have to reflect it. But that wouldn't be a change. That's something we've done forever. But my big one would be enable 6th through 8th, whether or not the other towns would accept that enabling. Thank you. Councillor Ryan?

My understanding is that this process of amendment is totally distinct from a discussion about a six through eight middle school. Is that correct? Or are they?

We'll find out on the 26th.

So we have basically we're in the dark here. We don't know. We'll find out on this. Right.

I mean, we can bring it up as a potential amendment. Right now, the agreement does not allow it. That's what Desi said. And so what I think Kathy was indicating is that should be something we bring up as potentially amending the agreement to allow something like that was her suggestion.

And just if you look at middle schools throughout the state, the norm is six through eight. Right. You know, it's unusual. I mean, sometimes it's six through 12 or seven through 12, but it's unusual. What we have is different.

So what will happen at this meeting is that this will be brought up. And are you looking for a consensus from the council or are you just letting us know that this is something that's going to be brought up?

At this point, I'm just looking for councillors that have ideas on things they've seen in the regional agreement or not seen in the agreement of things they'd like to see changed. How I would, if I presented it, couch it as these are items that councillors brought up in a general discussion without necessarily prioritizing any particular one, but that we would like to discuss as a four towns agreement.

Well, I would certainly add my voice for what it's worth to the what Kathy is talking about and hope that that would be at least brought up and brought to the attention of the regional school committee.

Thank you i'll go to Lynn before I.

I know we're not voting, but I think, first of all, I believe that Desi has said this has to be updated. I think that's part of the driving force. The other thing is, as Kathy has mentioned, if we in fact want to move to a six to eight voluntary joining, if you will, of any town into that, it has to be in the regional agreement in order to do that. I totally support that. So I want to make sure the regional agreement does that. And to the best of my knowledge, this does not mention the five-year averaging. So that has to be dealt with as well. The president has said they've never updated it to reference our form of government. Thank you.

So I just want to put out my list out there includes the three things that have already been mentioned, the form of government, the sixth grade, and update things that we've been doing. One thing I'd like to see is right now all of the capital projects at the region. are borrowed. They're paid for with borrowing money, whether they are $5,000 or $10,000, because there doesn't appear to be a way in the agreement to actually allow the school district to pay for those capital projects in cash. I would like to see that considered because that over long-term may save all four towns and the region a little bit of money if we can pay for some of the smaller projects in cash instead of actually borrowing and then paying interest on that borrowing. there are some sections that um i would like to see us ensure that we comply with the law on representation and voting of school committee members i think counselor shane mentioned that one um the regional agreement is unclear on when a vacancy occurs and how people are seated for that particularly when all elections don't occur at the same time for all four towns um it gets kind of odd so some of these are nitty-gritty things that that hopefully as attorneys look at it would be updated um and you know there's some things in the transportation section that i would like clarified um and i think at this point That is, oh, and there's one, there's a section in the regional agreement that says only the regional school committee can propose amendments to the regional agreement. I think this would have been very much more helpful, particularly with our form of government change, if we as a town council or legislative body could have formally started a process for potentially amending the regional agreement ourselves somehow. So I'd like us to consider mentioning that and and look at who is allowed to propose amendments to the regional agreement potentially adding in the legislative bodies of all four towns so that if something like this happens again we might not have to just rely on the regional school committee to

initiate the process and i'll just keep saying please please please so those those are some of my my requests and we've got jennifer tob next and then we'll go to kathy shane um well maybe this is more of a question but i was very surprised when i saw this how when it how long ago this single agreement so shouldn't there could we have that on some regular basis we revisit the agreement And, you know, I was also surprised that there was a dollar amount. It was in relation to how much we're renting classrooms. And I was surprised it said $100. Why they would put a dollar amount in an agreement? And this is, you know, over 30 years old. So I would think we would, you know, try and avoid dollar amounts because they can become outdated very quickly. Okay.

the regular review, similar to our charter decade, every decade review.

Okay.

Um, Kathy, Shane.

One other that has come up, and I don't know whether it's regional agreement per se or the other towns thinking about this, but we do, the region operates as its own entity for capital. So when we're asking about the middle school roof, they did the procurement, their facilities, people overlooked who it is, they chose who it is, and they Over time, it's not clear to me that they will always have the expertise. So the same way we did the sharing with Pelham just asked for us to take over treasurer and collector. Should we be doing that more jointly? We're 82% of the students in this. And with the regional track, and field, it was clear how important Bob Parent was and how important Dave Zomek. And they acknowledged it in terms of bringing in people that could really scrutinize the bids, scrutinize the designs. They don't have that in the regional staff. And it's not to belittle them at all. And pre-council, A long time ago, we did do facilities across the board, but we had a different level facility director in the town. So it's just, I'd like to open it up as there are shared services regional that might be to the benefit of the region and the town. And I don't know whether it would have made a difference with the roof, but the roof clearly has not gone well so far.

Thank you. Councillor Ryan, your hand is still raised. No. Any other thoughts from counselors before we move on? Andy, were you trying to raise your hand? I saw it pop up.

Andy. I would just note that one of the... Can you speak closer to the mic? One of the... problems of having the current sixth grade arrangement that we have is that we thought we were going to consolidate two elementary schools into one and we would be able to cut one administrative team. But because of not being able to have this unified six through eight, we're now paying for an extra administrative team for the sixth grade. So that's just a financial waste that would be great to see happen. And then I had a question on that all capital spending is through borrowing. Doesn't the region have an E&D account that they can spend from for capital?

Yes, they do. But when they vote the new capital projects each year, that is all borrowing only. So no new projects that get voted sort of as the capital program on a yearly basis come from anything but a borrowing authorization, at least every time I've seen it.

And they roll it up, Andy. So what you see is things like it's $5,000 project. That's still part of the debt. You know, I mean, it's not that some things are so little. Why don't we just pay for them? That's what Mandy is saying, the large things you want to spread out.

Any other comments? Seeing none, we will move on to the next agenda item. is action item 8a proposed zoning bylaw article 18 to consider amending the zoning bylaw by adopting a whole lot of things i'm going to put a motion on the table since this is the second read and then i will explain the process at this time so the motion is to adopt the proposed article 18 small clean energy infrastructure bylaw and associated amendments to zoning section 3 use classifications and standards section 5.11 renewable energy accessory spi slash best uses section 6.2 fences and article 12 definitions as shown on pages 11 to 29 of the motions sheet is there a second second rooney thank you we are going to start with the crc report and then move to the gol report so pam

The CRC report was provided to you last meeting on the 14th of, today's the 14th, must've been the 31st of August. At that time, I should say following that meeting, there was a subsequent meeting of the CRC to discuss questions and concerns that were raised by counselors and folks who wrote in from the public. In particular, we walked through each and every one of the suggested revisions or changes to the document, most of which had to do with setbacks from private wells as was brought up tonight in public comment. I don't know that I need to go into detail but that was the gist of the conversation in ultimately the vote by crc was to adopt the document with the changes that were provided um tonight in the in our packet thank you um on a different coffee gol

Same as last time, GL reviewed this for clarity, consistency, and actionability. We had a few minor changes and clarifications, nothing substantive as that is not our purview. And this was recommended to counsel as amended by GL.

Thank you. As people have seen in Emails from the public, there are likely some motions to amend the motion that was just made before those are made. Is there anyone who would like to make any general comments or discussion on the entire package at this time? Seeing none, I'm going to recognize Lynn Griesemer to make a motion to amend.

Thank you. I have two motions. I represent district two along with councilor Cannon-Martin. This is where there is the largest concentration of private wells and the water supplying those approximately 5% of the town of Amherst. So I'm respectfully asking that those wells be treated just the same way that any public water sources. So the first motion is to move to amend Article 18 by eliminating item 01 on the screen. At this number 18.08.014 to become 18.08.013 and item 18.08.05 to become 18.08.014.

thank you thank you um so the motion is on the screen except athena can you just quickly replace that 10 in the yellow with an 18 because we totally missed that the first time we read this i'm not sure there is a 108015 so um is there a second to that motion shane seconds We are now discussing only the motion to amend that is on the floor, which relates to solar photovoltaic installation, no disturbance zones for private wells. That what you see that is the effect of it would be to change the no disturbance area for private wells from 100 feet to 200 feet. That's all this amendment is doing. So all discussion must relate to that request a motion to amend. Seeking hands. Councilor Brevick.

I just wanted to speak in support of counselor agree summers amendments I represent district one where we also have a large number of comparatively of homes with private wells, I know that this is a big concern to constituents in my district. And I think just in thinking about some of the comments we received. I. I think that there are good reasons for setbacks from public water sources. I think that that same rationale should be applied to private water sources. I don't see why we would have a distinction between the two. And I think it's really important to think about issues with herbicides and cleaning solvents in addition to PFAS. But the clear cutting use of herbicides and the surrounding problems do have impacts on our private wells. And the testing and water quality issues that would result, the responsibility for that falls on the homeowner. So we would have to be responsible for monitoring and testing our wells. And yeah, I think that there are, again, lots of good reasons for the setback from public water sources. And I want to see that applied to private water sources as well. Thank you. Councillor Ryan.

So we've heard from two members of our planning board that, first of all, by doubling the distance from 100 to 200 feet, it actually quadruples the amount of prohibited land, which would likely render some, if not many, potential photovoltaic installations unfeasible. We've also been told that there is no, and I'm happy to hear that there might be, but from what I know, there is no connection between water contamination and photovoltaic panels. There's no evidence, no concern. It seems simply to be a fear. Now, if there's evidence or there's, then I'd like to hear it. But according to at least two members of our flying board, Not only that, but in some cases, you have an installation and the water that runs over the photovoltaic panels is then used as drinking was used as water for the project. It seems that the distinction between what we're talking about here and public water supply, again, the point was made that the primary threat from solar installations is surface erosion and sedimentary runoff. And that's the major threat to public water supply. It's on the surface. And so there is, in fact, a reason to make a distinction between subsurface wells and public water supply. And so there's a very good purpose in keeping those two distinct. So just as someone who doesn't live in District 1 or District 2 and doesn't have large numbers or some constituents coming to me and saying, you need to do something about this, I struggle to get a reason other than constituent fear why I should support this. Because what I do support, and I presume many of my colleagues support, is trying to meet our energy, our climate goals, our energy goals, And it seems like if we approve this, we're going to make it much more difficult, at least in terms of solar installations, to meet those goals. So I would like someone who supports this amendment to help me understand why we should quadruple the impact by doubling the distance, and why, in fact, there is a serious threat of contamination when there isn't.

Thank you. My hand is raised next. In addition to everything Councillor Ryan said, I would add that our Water Supply Protection Committee did a white paper a number of years ago looking at the specific issue of potential contamination regarding solar and BESS installations, and then made recommendations on distances. for the solar photovoltaic installations. The current draft of the bylaw completely follows and complies with those recommendations. Those recommendations were then contained within the solar bylaw working groups recommendations that were sent to the Council, which means the Water Supply Protection Committee believed 100 feet was sufficient on a no disturbance zone to protect from erosion along with our stormwater and erosion protection bylaws, private water supply wells, water wells, and 200 was what was needed for public wells that the well heads are bigger on public wells than they are on private wells. and our solar bylaw working group agreed with that and that's the distances they forwarded to us i am at this point urging the council to follow the experts that made those recommendations of 100 feet for private and 200 feet for public we will move to counselor kano martin

yeah um i just wanted to speak up as well in support of this motion for many of the reasons that have already been stated i do think it's really important to have the same level of protection for a public water source as well as a private water source so if we're saying you know it's 200 feet for a public i feel like we're creating a system where we don't give the equal consideration to folks who may be on well water, which happens to be the case of a lot of the constituents in District 2. Many of them came out to our recent district meeting to voice their concerns about this issue, including some folks who are part of the Smart Solar Amherst group and have been working on this issue for six years to encourage responsible solar development and have quite a bit of expertise on the issue and have spoken up about the importance of not clear cutting forests to create more solar panels or put more solar panels and that's something that I agree with as well. I think we need both. I think we need solar energy and we need to keep our forests because in terms of mitigating climate change, that having a forest is a major factor in that. So I do entrust their guidance on this issue and some of the other folks who have provided public comment to us. I think we've had comments coming in both directions of whether or not this is actually a threat to the water supply. and from people who are very informed on the issue so i think let's go the cautious route for now that doesn't mean that we can't update it later but i think it's important protecting water is needs to be a priority for our town thank you thank you andy churchill um i want i think that

both Lynn and Amber have done a good job of representing their constituents, and we've certainly heard a lot from District 2 constituents, but the CRC considered these amendments in a meeting last week, and we did look at the recommendations of the Water Supply Protection Committee, whose recommendations were incorporated in the current language. I also went back and looked at some of the discussion that happened during their consideration. And our assistant DPW Superintendent Risecki talked about why there's a difference between public water supplies and wells. And she said, the way the hydrology works is that the more water a well pumps, the larger area of groundwater it draws from. The zone of influence is obviously different for a private well versus a public well that pumps over a million gallons a day. That is why those setbacks are sized differently. We heard from an architect who's done a lot of Efficient building work with solar panels who noted that the requirement for septic systems distance from a private well is 100 feet. And that has a higher, in his opinion and in mine, that has a higher likelihood of contaminating a well than solar panels that, as he stated, don't have runoff that's going to contaminate the wells. I'm not an expert on water, but we do have committees for a reason where we get experts and staff together to look at technical issues. And because we have a water supply protection committee and we have staff who staff that with technical expertise, I tend to defer to them on technical issues, which I believe this is one. Um, and I think for that reason, the CRC voted four and a nothing was one absent, uh, to not support this, uh, amendment.

Kathy Shane.

I think it's good that I'm glad this is up on the screen. If you look at the paragraph that's being eliminated, it had an additional clause that said, provided that the PGA may require a larger no disturbance area due to site characteristics and conditions, And I just looked at where are the wells in Amherst? They're only in one small area and there are 20, 22 homes with those private wells. And what are those site characteristics? Very steep hills, lots of trees. So it's possible that the PGA might have said in addition to pure contamination, there is a stormwater runoff, there is an erosion. that all could affect. So it's not just what's in the solar panel. So there was at the discretion of the PGA in the amended, in the 1808014, which will become 13, a minimum or no disturbance area. Again, this word is the disturbance area and they don't have the additional provision because it's thought that the disturbance area moving it And remember, we're talking about cutting down all the trees as part of the disturbance area. And so I think we're talking about a very small portion of Amherst. So although 200 times two is a lot of land, it's in one small corner where this has occurred. And there's a reason that the town water supply doesn't go up there. It's very tricky. It's rocky. It's slidey. And so I think this is an excellent amendment because it also doesn't have to have the PGA look at the disturbance area and make a different decision. It's just a nice, clean 200 feet.

Sam McLeod.

Thank you, Mandy. And thank you others for your comments and explanations so far. I did read all the comments that were submitted from the public, both from those in the region, including the, as well as the planning board. I understand that there, to me, it seems that there can be more than one issue here aside from just the water. So I would rhetorically ask question, you know, Is it more than just the water that's being discussed here? Is it the forest and or land concentration? Is that part of the mindset behind the suggested amendments? That's what jumped into my mind when I first thought about it. I take at face value the assertions from the planning board members regarding the water risk for open reservoir versus private wells, although there are short wells and there are deep wells, and I'm a bit ignorant as to what the nature of the wells in town are. I have in the past lived in a home that had a short well, and I can assure everyone that it's starkly different than an artesian well. And so those thoughts have entered my mind. And can we confirm again about how many wells we're talking about in town? It's clear from the comments, let me restate that, it appears from the comments that those who live in the area that's apt to be under discussion have a fair amount of opposition to the shorter distance of private wells versus reservoirs, the 100 feet versus the 200. But does anyone know with confirmation? I heard you, Kathy, and I listened carefully. Is it in fact about 200 wells and are they in fact and are there not wells in other parts of town? Thank you.

I looked up. Hold on. Hold on. I was going to go to Stephanie Ciccarelli. You have not been recognized and see if Stephanie, our conservation commissioner, has any knowledge of that question, Stephanie.

I sincerely apologize that I don't know the number of wells off the top of my head. So I apologize.

Thank you. Kathy, would you like to correct the statement that?

Yeah, I just want to say there's a database, and it said go to the database, put the word Amherst in, and it came up with about 24. One was decommissioned, and all the, where it's Market Hill, Flat Hills, there were a bunch of roads. So we're not talking about all throughout town. We're talking about this cluster. And so I did not 200, 20 to 25.

We're not going to have a conversation. That's where I got the number. You got it. Do we know how accurate that is, I guess, is the question. But moving on to Councilor Ryan.

I do get the feeling this is about more than just water. I'm still waiting to hear from somebody about the terrifying health effects that this could have. My ears are wide open. I'm hearing about clear cutting. I don't know what that has to do with this at all. This has to do with the risks that a solar array would pose to a well system. And it's been looked at and reviewed and studied. And the recommendation of those who do this for a living is that a 100-foot buffer is perfectly adequate. We're hearing from some people, including some counselors, that it's not. And I'm waiting to hear why it's not adequate. It seems to be more fear based on what? Again, I'm looking for some kind of expert guidance who would say to me, well, look at this. This is what is happening somewhere else, but I'm not hearing that. What I'm hearing instead is that these kinds of arrays are perfectly safe. They don't pose any kind of imminent threat to public health. And 100 foot buffer is more than adequate to deal with them in this circumstance also rather obvious to me at least. That the area we're talking about is one area in which solar arrays could actually be constructed at a size that could actually make a difference in terms of our climate goals in terms of what we're trying to do in a larger. picture, and I have to say that this kind of, well, anyway, so this is an important area, and I'd be happy to support the amendment if I had any kind of sense that this actually posed, even remotely, a health threat, and I'm not hearing it. So, again, I'm waiting to hear that. I'm really not interested in, well, that's fine. Thank you.

Thank you. I apologize to Jennifer Taub who has unraised her hand. I'm confused. You were supposed to be recognized because we're supposed to recognize those that have not spoken before those that have. So Jennifer.

Thank you. No, I think if it's, so I am very interested in the number is if it's 24, I think we can err on the side of caution for those, for a small number of wells, because the concern I was hearing is that that would then take a huge swath of where the installations could go sort of would make them, there would not be room for them. But if we're only talking about 24 wells, that's why that number seems important to me. If we're talking about a relatively small area where we're erring on the side of caution, I mean, that, That's part of what my thinking is. So it makes a big, I think if it's 24 wells, at least it negates the argument that we're making it so that we can't have these installations in Amherst. That's what some of the public comments that came in said, if you have 200 feet, that's gonna take a huge swath of where the installations could go kind of out of reach. But if we're only talking about a couple of dozen wells, there's still plenty of room for the installations.

Thank you. Councillor Brevick has not spoken yet.

yeah i think just two things i guess sort of to respond to counselor ryan i think one um one of the things i was going to say i think jennifer covered and i think that is important to note that we are talking about a relatively small number of properties um but I don't think the language that was in the bylaw before the amendment was black and white. Yes, this is safe. No, this is not safe. It allows for variations on the 100 feet depending on the characteristics of the property. So right there, you can see that they're not able to say 100 feet is the magic number that makes this safe or unsafe. And so agreeing with Jennifer's sentiment as well, the stakes are very high. Those of us who live in these properties, our children are drinking this water for many years before you would know. It would take decades to know if there was contamination. And then that brings me to the second point, which is the research, the question of the research, which A, we did get many public comments that were well researched, but B, This technology hasn't been around for long enough to have as much definitive research as we want to have. And that means it's our responsibility during this time to be conservative when the impact of being conservative is low, the risk is low, and the reward of being conservative in this sense would be very high for the families affected by this. Thank you. Andy Churchill.

Several people have noted that the current language says that the PGA, the approving entity, may require a large or no disturbance area due to site characteristics and conditions. And that was not seen as a reason to go to 200. It was a reason to not go to 200 for everybody because based on things that are enumerated in other parts of this bylaw, it takes into account the amount of slope or the conditions of runoff and what's the plan for restricting runoff. So throughout the article is... you know loads of requirements for looking at site suitability and the state has a site suitability index for all types of land and and that's that's required to be used so you know i i think 24 wells depending on how they're distributed could could cancel out quite a bit of land and uh it doesn't just because there's 24 of them doesn't mean that you know if you're if you're increasing if you're doubling the amount of land that's off limits that's four times the area that's off limits and then depending on how they're um how they're uh located it could cancel quite a bit of um area and so i guess i'm i'm fairly new to this coming in this year and uh being on crc this year but one of my first questions was are we trying to encourage solar development are we trying to discourage it and i think we've tried to set a you know set of balance um take into it into account you know the the actual um types of requirements that make for a good project the types of um harms that could come from a project that's too steeply sloped or that has too much runoff or that You know, the amount of plantings underneath aren't taken care of, that the fire department hasn't been consulted. You know, all of that stuff is in this article or in this bylaw. So, and to have the flexibility that the PGA may require a large or no disturbance area due to any of those site characteristics and conditions. You know, again, City Council Chambers, Our water supply protection committee said 100 feet and they and they noted and it's been noted that you know septic you can put a septic field in and that's only 100 feet and that's a bigger more obvious contaminate contaminate or for a while then. City Council Chambers, Then panels so.

City Council Chambers, Thank you, our conservation. City Council Chambers, agent stephanie chikara chikara has raised her hand so stephanie.

Thank you, Councilor Haneke. So I'm listening very carefully, and I definitely understand the concern of those on private wells. I guess I want to say that, first of all, I think the language that is in the originally proposed is sufficient to protect this area. There are lots of measures that are put in place as part of this bylaw. So, for instance, any erosion control, stormwater management are all part of the assessment when constructing a project. So just talking about a distance in and of itself is not going to offer protection. One of the comments that was made was that there was concern about pesticides being used or herbicides being used in clearing the land. There's no control over private residents doing those types of things on their properties themselves. So I'm not sure that that argument really would suffice in looking at this particular issue. There would be certainly protections of distances. I was the wetlands administrator for many years. I'm actually the director of sustainability now. So I was very involved in conservation commission meetings and reviews of projects and trying to ensure that there were protections for water sources and water supplies, especially limiting use of pesticides and herbicides. Those things would come up in review. If they were an issue, they would come up as part of that process. And they are within 100 feet. I think 200 feet is a concern over public water supply being treated differently. But again, if you're looking at the hydrology, they're different. They are different. The zone of influence is different. So to say that one is being unfairly given protection over another is really not adequate. It's based on the science of what would happen to those particular water bodies based on where they draw from. So I understand the concerns, but I think there's been a lot of discussion and a lot of review and a lot of weighing the potential concerns and consequences. So I would just urge you to leave the language as is and reject the amendment. Thank you.

Lynn Griesemer.

Thank you. First of all, I would like to refer you to a situation that in fact occurred in Pecos, Texas, where a serious damage happened to a whole solar farm and then contaminated all the wells of the people right there and making their water supply and thus their homes basically useless. Okay? Fear may be what you think is driving this, but I will also tell you that in the time that I've sat on the council, the District 2 people that have studied this, some of whom spoke tonight, others of whom worked with me on the amendments that, thank you, CRC, did approve, were basically to try to find ways to further protect What happens? So, for example, one of the things that got changed in the bylaws as it came to you tonight was the definition of weather. Basically, it talked about a rain event. Now it talks about severe weather events. We've seen hurricanes. We've seen tornadoes. We've seen flooding. We've seen fires that happen. And so that as you look at this, what you've done, what you're doing, I am not opposed to solar. My husband and I have huge amounts of solar on our land. But the reality is when you look at this, we don't know all the things that could come to pass. We've seen more and more weird weather in the last five years than we've seen in the last 50 years. So I totally and completely understand the concern of those people in District 2. I have to believe it's much more than 22 wells. I can count 22 houses on Flat Hills alone that all have wells. And that's not even counting where Jill lives and other places in District 1. So fear, yes. Reality, the reality is we don't know what else is out there. And once you disturb this land, you've taken away a lot of the natural ability of the land to replenish itself and to protect the water that's underneath it. Thank you.

Thank you. I am next of those who haven't spoken twice and have only spoken once. The one thing I was going to say is I just counted the number of properties in the High Point neighborhood, and that is 48 alone. So I don't know where Kathy Shane's data came from. I'm not criticizing you for reading the number you saw. I just, I can't trust it at this point because it's... Every one of those houses has to have their own well, and that's 48 right there. So for some reason, whatever that data source was must not be accurate of some sort.

The database may have picked up just new wells.

That could be. It was the only place I could find the county wells. So I just wanted to point that out for my comment. And so then Sam McLeod, do you still have another comment? Your hand is raised. Yes. Okay. So then we'll move to Councilor Ryan.

So how serious are we about our climate action and sustainability goals? Um, are we going to let the idea that, well, we just don't know what could happen. So let's double the distance. Why not treble the distance? Why not make it 500 feet? I'm struggling again to see how this is driven by anything other than, you know, pesticides, herbicides, clear-cutting, global weather events, none of which this bylaw addresses because it can't. Or in the case of pesticides and herbicides, it already does address it quite clearly. So it feels like, again, an example of a community that says, yes, we really care about the climate, and we realize that there's a climate crisis, but we're going to take it slow. We're going to be cautious. We're going to be conservative. If there's anything that I understand about the climate crisis, the time for caution and conservative action is long past. That doesn't mean we should take actions which put people at real risk. And I realize that there is this concern. But I'm not hearing from the people who study this that that concern is legitimate or real. And yet it sounds like many of my colleagues are willing to go ahead and put in this excessive restriction because you just never know what could happen. Well, one thing I do know that is happening is the climate crisis is real and we need to do whatever we can as a community to address it. How is this actually furthering our climate and sustainability goals?

Thank you. We have one more hand raised and we've been on this motion to amend for 40 minutes. So I'm hoping that will be the last, but we'll see come Andy Churchill.

Yeah, I just, you know, we heard from a former wetlands administrator and current sustainability coordinator, who is one of the most knowledgeable people I know about this and who's also facilitated discussions by a number of other technical experts on the topic. This has been worked on for many years. It's gone through hearings from the planning board and CRC. And and technical staff have worked on it. But I'm just struck by our former wetlands administrator and current sustainability coordinator saying there's enough protection in here. And there's the flexibility of language that says, based on any of the other characteristics that are going to be considered as well, They can be required to have a larger no disturbance area. So I think we're adequately protected. I think what we have now currently balances environmental goals and safety goals. And so I really, I think we should respect staff expertise on this as well as the committee that we specifically have to talk about water supply protection.

Thank you, Andy and I forgot to apologize when when stephanie kindly corrected me for referring wrong I am sorry stephanie director of sustainability is what she is right now. One more hand anything new to add Sam mcleod.

Thank you, Mandy. I guess new to add would just be a question, an inquiry. A few counselors have referenced that it's prudent to proceed with caution when there's unknown. Does the bylaw have avenues down the road for revisiting? Should there be new information that comes in in the future with certainty related to risks? I assume that it's the same as any other bylaw in that it's written into quote-unquote law until it's reviewed, but what is the prospect of altering the distances in the future should information of significance be brought to the committee and the council. Thank you.

As the legislative body, the Town Council can amend a bylaw at any time through the process accorded to it through the Charter and the MGL. So it can be amended if more information were to be done through the same process this bylaw amendment has gone through. Seeing no other hands, assuming that those two hands are lingering, Councillor Ryan okay we are going to move to a vote on the motion to amend number one that is the motion on the on the screen and on the floor and I vote adopts these changes you see and no vote keeps the original On a motion to amend the total required since I just got this, I will ask Athena to confirm is a simple majority of those that are present and voting, I believe. And she is nodding. We'll get to the bylaw equation after that, but this motion is a simple majority of those that are present and voting. We start with Pam Rooney. Uh, no. Councilor Ryan?

Nay.

Kathy Shane? Yes. Jennifer Taub? Yes. Councilor Walker is absent. Councilor Brevik? Yes. Councilor Kano-Martin? Yes. Andy Churchill?

No.

Ana Devlin-Gauthier. Nay. Lynn Griesemer. Aye. Mandy Johanneke is a nay. Councillor Lord. Aye. Sam McLeod.

Aye.

The motion received. Seven ayes and five nays, which is a simple majority of 12 voting. So the motion to amend passes. Lynn, do you have another motion to amend to make?

I do, thank you. I move to amend item 18.08.024 to eliminate and or and after the words public surface water supply, add the words, and or private wells, so that it reads as seen on the screen. And then to eliminate the next paragraph, because it would no longer be necessary. And that is shown on the screen.

Is there a second to that motion? Shane seconds. Again, the motion is on the floor to amend, as seen on the screen. The amendments are in red, basically. Discussion? Lynn, would you like to speak to it?

It's really along the same lines as the one we've just had, so I don't see any need to spend a whole lot more time on it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further discussion? Anna. Anna.

So the big difference for me in this particular one is really when we're thinking about the installation of battery storage systems and the risk of fire. For me, the piece here that sticks out is the possible contamination from firefighting materials and how that could possibly impact groundwater supply. So this one does feel slightly different to me.

Any further hands? Seeing no other hands, we will move to a vote. We start with Councilor Ryan. Let me clarify. An aye vote adopts the changes in red. A no vote does not adopt the changes in red. Apologize for that. Councilor Ryan. Kathy Shane?

Yes.

Jennifer Taub? Yes. Councilor Walker is absent. Councilor Breivik? Yes. Councilor Cano-Martin? Yes. Andy Churchill?

No.

Ana Devlin-Gauthier? Aye. Lynn Griesemer?

Aye.

Mandy Johanneke is a no. Councilor Lord?

Aye.

Sam McLeod?

Aye.

And Pam Rooney? No. That is eight in favor, four opposed with one absent. That motion passes by a simple majority. We are now on back to the main motion, unless there are other motions to amend. If there are other motions to amend, please raise your hand because I'd like to start with those first.

Lynn, do you have a third?

Okay.

I wanted to make a comment.

I'm going to wait to see if anyone else has motions to amend. Seeing no other hands, we're on to the main motion that includes both motions to amend that were made because they both passed. Lynn, you wanted to make a comment?

I want to thank the various committees starting way back with actually Pat DeAngelis drafted the first attempt at a bylaw on this. And I think that was about five years ago. I also want to thank CRC for sitting through about an hour and a half the other day when we not only looked at the questions and changes I was requesting and adopted most of those and also those from one of my strong residents and knowledgeable residents of District 2. I really feel like this is an outstanding bylaw, and I hope that, frankly, we start covering parking lots and buildings we own instead of cutting down trees. Thank you. Bye.

Any further discussion before we move to a vote? Seeing none, we are voting on the main motion to adopt the proposed Article 18 Small Clean Energy Infrastructure By-law as amended tonight and associated amendments to Zoning Section 3 Use Classifications and Standards 5.11 Renewable Energy Accessory SPI and Best Uses 6.2 Fences and Article 12 Definitions as shown on page 11 to 29 of the motion sheet and as amended. We start with Cathy Shane.

Yes.

Jennifer Topp. Yes. Councilor Walker is absent. Councilor Brevik. Yes. Councilor Kahneman-Martin. Yes. Andy Churchill.

Yes.

Ana Devongafia. Aye. Lynn Griesemer. Aye. Mandy Johanicki is an aye. Councilor Lord.

Aye.

Sam McCloud.

Aye.

Pam Rooney. Yes. and Councilor Ryan. Aye. That is 12 in favor and no one opposed. It needed a two-thirds vote to pass. It passes. I want to thank the Director of Sustainability, Stephanie Ciccarello, the entire Planning Department, many of whom have been in meetings with us for upwards of three and a half years, as well as Stephanie, and as well as the Planning Board, the Solar By-law Working Group, the Water Supply Protection Committee, and everyone else who has been a part of getting this to this point in the day. At the time, this will become effective in two weeks from tonight in time for the state regulated clean energy infrastructure regulations going into effect on October 1. So thank you all. We move on. It is 819. We would normally take a break at this time. The only items left on our agenda are reports and counselor comments. So I'm hoping we can just push through to the end without a break. seeing no objection we are going to move on all the appointments were done in consent so we are on to committee and liaison reports are there any committee or liaison reports from town council committees that need to add anything that we didn't hear from already we start with Anna

GOL has the meeting tomorrow because our meeting on the 22nd coincides with the Hampshire College Charette. So we are meeting tomorrow afternoon, 3.30 to 5.30. No one has canceled on me from GOL yet, so we're still doing it. GOL is currently in the midst of two really important projects and your insights and feedback are welcome on both. The first is the town manager evaluation process. Specifically, we are looking at the feedback that we seek from staff as well as committee heads and the public. So we will be discussing that tomorrow, essentially just really trying to make sure that we're getting feedback that we're able to use. If we're having folks take time out to tell us their thoughts, we want to make sure that we're able to use it and move forward. And then the second thing that we are discussing is the resident oversight board. We are smack dab in the middle of those discussions. They are ongoing. If you have thoughts that you'd like to share with the committee, you're welcome to tell all of us um but please also consider emailing them to me and i will share them with the committee in our meeting as we go forward if anyone has questions about about specifically where we are at in that process i'm happy to discuss further but you can also generally get an idea from our reports thank you thank you pam rooney for crc oh i have no crc i was going to do dpw we're not there yet um counselor ryan for tso

So my report was later than usual. I apologize if you didn't get a chance to look at it. Just again, we are working our way slowly but firmly through the waste hauler RFP. We're working our way through the decision points at this early stage. We're about four. We've gone through four points. We have 10 to do. But just so you understand at this point, we're recommending a five-year contract, weekly trash pickup, a 45-gallon container, and then everything else goes into an overflow bag. That's not written in stone, but that's where we are at the moment. Then at the meeting next, which is this Thursday, we'll be taking up the remaining decision points. So if you get a moment, please look at the report. And if you have thoughts or concerns, you should send them to the committee.

Thank you. Seeing no other hands for council committees, we're moving on to town committees with councilor members. This includes BCG, DPW, Elementary, JCPC, Jones Library, TPC. We start with Pam Rooney for DPW Building Committee.

Thank you. DPW Building Committee will meet this Wednesday. I think that's the 16th at 10 a.m. And we will be reviewing the work of the consultants who have confirmed number of staff people, number of vehicles, space allocations for the different functions that they feel are important to accommodate in a new facility. So it's a key point in time to basically reconcile the desires and the needs.

Thank you. Kathy Shane for Elementary School Building Committee.

Yeah, we met last Friday. We're basically doing updates, but as Paul already shared a picture that the demolition of the old Fort Rivers School has happened, is happening. One of the issues that has come up and the team is going to be, is addressing it is, are there particulates in the air that are coming down on the playground area for the children? And despite there's a regular watering down of the area to try to do that, there's also construction going on or will be of the land around it. So there's going to be a memo prepared to be distributed to all the parents on what is being done. I had a question just today from my co counselor of should we should the kids be wearing masks so that, you know, we're just going to try to I will follow up on those. And Mindy, I just want to say a quick word about finance. I forgot to raise. Sure.

Finance.

Finance meets tomorrow. We haven't met since the last time the council met, but tomorrow, and it's in the packet, is the fourth quarter, FY26. So if you think of fourth quarter, it's basically end of year of the last fiscal year. An update on Jones project, the Belt Library project financing, both the town side and the trustee side. a report from the ad hoc budget book committee with recommendations. And if the finance committee votes that out, it will come to the council then as recommendations. And the last part is purely just from the finance director, a timeline on the budget for FY28, just a list of dates so that people can see when what things happen. So all of those should by now be in the packet. And so you can tune into the Zoom later on if you want to, or you can just read the materials.

Thank you. Lynn, do you have a question? Because you're not chair of any of the committees I named. Lynn. Okay. Can you speak closer to the mic?

Yeah, it seems like the only way to get a sense of cost is to put out an RFP. And the RFP, however, makes it sound as if we as a council have made a decision. So I'm trying to see if you can speak to that conundrum and your thoughts about it.

Councilor Ryan.

Well, people could weigh in with their thoughts about what they think the trash size should be or how often they're pick up should be, but we have to give the vendors some idea of what it is that we're going to ask them to do. Otherwise, we won't get a reliable cost. So it has been the understanding of this committee, but it could change. We have a new council that there is a strong desire to institute a program that will allow for pay as you throw to bring people to reduce their A putting of trash into the landfill and that we should include compost as a town wide service because a large portion of what goes into the landfill is compostable and in fact shouldn't go into the landfill. So we went through this in the previous council, and that's the kind of guidance that we are using as we proceed. We are kind of coming to some specific decision points, because that's why they're called decision points, where we have to choose a size. It doesn't mean that will be the final size, but at least we'll get some kind of feedback from the vendor as to cost. But you are right that cost is a major factor. And the only way we can get a figure is to put out a RFP that will attract competitive bids. So I don't have an answer to that solution, I think, or that puzzle. I think that's kind of where we're at. But as we go through it, decision point by decision point, we certainly welcome thoughts from community members or from fellow counselors as to their thoughts. The next topic is recyclables. And compostables will be obviously also there. And so tune in and make suggestions. But at some point, we do have to put together, hopefully sooner rather than later, or at least an answer to the set of decision points so that the consultant can create an RFP so it can go out to the vendors so that we can get an answer as to how much we think this might cost and whether anyone's interested in providing the services that we're asking for. But the key services that we are asking for is basically composting town-wide and a pay-as-you-throw system.

Thank you. I want to remind the council this is a committee report section, so we are not here to debate the questions that Councillor Ryan just brought up from TSO. If councillors wish to discuss the questions he brought up as a council, I request that you make a request during the agenda. Future agenda item section of it, because I don't want to violate open meeting law by getting into a discussion on something that was not noticed. I saw a lot of hands go up, which is why I'm giving you this caution here. Kathy, Shane.

I just have a question on terminology of RFI versus RFP. So I think of an RFP as you're getting a proposal to do something, and an RFI is giving you the information we need to make it. So it's not a, I know you've been deliberating on this, but I thought there was going to be a step where we would have those pieces. And I very much see the way you've been doing it, and I like that. But if you don't want that piece and you want this piece, and then you assemble it all, get information on the individual pieces.

I believe TSO already went through an RFI process. So I'm sure Councillor Ryan as chair can dig up the report that discusses the RFI process and the results of that for the council and give us the date of that report at some future time. I know you can't do that now.

That would be great.

Thank you. Moving on to liaison reports. Are there any liaisons that have reports?

Councilor Lord. Thank you. I would like to say that the CSSJC is hard at work always, and they're having their retreat on the 26th of September from 9 to 1. And they will be hopefully on the agenda sometime before the end of the year. Thank you.

Thank you. If they request, we would need to go through the same process that we went through last time. If you need help navigating that process, please contact me, Counselor Lord. Jennifer, talk.

And the retreat will be via Zoom? We can watch the retreat?

The question is, is the CSSJC retreat on Zoom or in person? How would someone see it?

Thank you for asking that. There was a request to Amherst Media, if maybe it could be broadcast. May I get back to you on that? I will follow up to see what's happening.

Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Lord. I'm seeing no other hands. We move to the town manager report.

Thank you. So Friday, we are having the Cup of Joe with Jeff Bagg. You can do two things that day. You can get three things. You can have breakfast. You can go to a new restaurant, Azote Kitchen at 460 West Street, which is a really exciting new venue. And we're hoping that people start to discover it and also talk with Jeff about anything you want or me about anything you want. But also we're thinking that the conversation will focus on Hampshire restaurants. because we have the zoning coming up next week, September 22nd and 24th, which you're all aware of, staying on the Hampshire piece. We also are working to finalize, we're offering, we're working with Hampshire to make sure that their swimming pool can be accessed by the town people. And so the recreation department is organizing lots of different things happening at the pool. They're letting us program the entire full 24 hours a day if we want. And so it's been very generous for them. It sort of helps them to a certain degree, but I think it's more out of generosity. And we're trying to build that relationship so we can continue to access other resources that they may have. We think this will be a really strong connection with them. So that's a positive thing. And lastly, the block party is coming up on Thursday. So... Hopefully it won't rain, but people should come in. It's really the biggest day of the year for downtown.

Thank you. Counselor Kendall Martin with a question.

uh yeah i just have um two quick questions um one is if um in collaboration with the dpw you could share at least like a tentative paving schedule because we've had a lot of constituent questions and i understand weather and conditions can change but just like at least a tentative schedule for the next fiscal year so i can give folks an idea of when it will happen and then the other thing i just wanted to ask is if there's any progress on the wildwood reuse committee

So both of those things I talked with the DPW direct superintendent this morning. They do not have a schedule yet. They're working with the vendor on that. I really want them to get started this fall. But it's really going through the DPW on that. Wildwood committee, we're finalizing that. That will be prepared probably this week, maybe this weekend. But within the next week, I think we'll have a draft of something for people to review for Wildwood reuse committee. is that something where we're recruiting for the from the public yes yes absolutely so it'll be announced that there are positions yeah i want to get a draft out let's get some feedback on it then we'll get people to make the call for it thank you council ryan question

I'm delighted to hear that we're making use of the Hampshire College pool. My questions are two. One, you suggested that somehow this is helping them. Is that because basically the thing's being used and the facility is active and that's good? Is there a financial arrangement? And I'm wondering what cost, if any, there is to the town. I think it's probably worth it, but I'm just curious what the cost would be to the town to use this facility as long as we can. Apparently the middle school, right now the middle school pool is not available anyway. So this is good.

so yeah so um there's the the college is not charging the town anything to use it um the aquatics program is self self-supporting so and if and what we said is that if we made if we made money we would split the profit with them or something like that it's it's going to be this first six months are going to be it's probably not going to it's going to be there's there's things that we might want to invest there um the the advantage for the college is that it gets used which means the pool is has a certified pool operator and you know maintaining the the facility um it's just the pool not the rest of that building just to be clear and also um you know the the as we have done in the past hampshire students and faculty and staff are able to take advantage of any of our programs whether the residents of the town or not but there is some cost to the town to maintain the pool and um Yeah, we have a draft agreement that we're working through on the details. But, you know, the aquatics director has done a really detailed sort of analysis of the income coming in from the different programs. They rented for swim teams and things like that as well. We will not lose money on it for sure.

Thank you. Kathy Shane, questions of the town manager.

I wanted to just build on Amber's question about the Wildwood Committee. If possible, Paul, I think it would be a good idea to put, there was a facilities condition report done for the Elementary School Building Committee on Wildwood, And then there was an update that the town did. Both of those, I think people may not understand the extent to which the current building is not very usable. The wiring is shot, the HVAC is shot, the ceiling has asbestos in it, the walls aren't insulated. I could go on on it, but it would just be good to put them up because it's not a matter of just opening the doors. and walking into it. It operates off of oil, by the way. That's its heating system. You know, it was a pretty thorough report that was done, which was even if we did a renovation of it, it was going to be a gut renovation, not a just fix some things. So that's just an advice as a background piece of information that the public probably hasn't seen.

Of course. So we've also had staff. We've only took it over on September 1. Today's September 14th. So the staff have been over there last week to assess the building today. And it's current condition and looking at different ways that we can use different pieces of it. If we can't use the entire building. Also, looking at ways we can sort of carve off maybe using the gym or something like that independently, maybe get a different heating system. So it would have to run the whole thing. So there's a lot of thought being put into it. But the reuse committee is really going to be about long term. what are the options available to them?

And I just want to be, it may not be reuse of the building, but reuse of the land. And so we have a very outdated assessment of that. The 14 acres is assessed at less than Applewood's eight acres. So it might be good as soon as we can to get an assessed value of the land, not the building, but the land, yeah.

Mm-hmm.

I have one other thing just to build off the public comments we heard on Pickleball. So people understand when the comment was made on how popular this is, the Bay Road Club had 450 people signed up playing Pickleball. Mill River, there are two groups that play there. Between them, there's over 200 names and I'm not getting all of them. So the original proposal was to put it on the extra parking lot that's by the tennis courts, not by the tennis courts, by the basketball courts. And I think, and that was originally proposed because it's already paved and you wouldn't have to do it. So someone on Pickleball said, why not put the tennis courts there and put the pickleball courts, because then the pickleball noise will be further away from the houses. So it's just, there's not just a realign the courts, but people are driving to Belcher Town and Rally House. Whoever had the brilliant idea of Rally House, people are paying three times more than we paid at Hampshire for indoor courts. So there's a huge need. A lot more people are playing it than you might think because it's so age-accessible. So it's just a plea to underscore the two voices that came here.

Thank you. Pam, any questions?

Yes, I wondered if we could get an update on the restroom at Kendrick Park.

Sure. So as of Friday, the The fiber connection was completed. It's kind of amazing how they had to discover it because they had to put a flashlight, not a flashlight, a high powered light at the police station, which then traveled across because there were 144 different little fibers that they had to identify which one is actually gonna activate that building. So there's a lot more to that I can talk to you about. But anyway, it's up and running. We have a contractor who will be maintaining it on a daily basis, the facility. DPW will have control over locking and unlocking it remotely. It will have standard hours like we normally do, which is dawn to dusk. Yeah, dawn to dusk typically is how we maintain those facilities.

Thank you. Counselor Brevik.

And it will be open for the block party. It will be open for the block party. Okay.

Councilor Pevick.

I just had two comments. Well, one comment and a question both related to safety and air quality with the school building. Well, so one with the amethyst brook spray issue with the spray mixed with dust spraying back on the children on the playground and amethyst brook was already mentioned by Kathy. I just wanted to reiterate the concern around this and see if there was possibly a way to use, if there are any surplus funds. I imagine there are probably some inexpensive solutions we could put into place quickly, ideally, to shield the playground from the spray. What's happening is the spray is working to tamp down the dust, but when there's wind, it kicks back. And so my children are reporting being slimy. Everything is... So we can do better than that, I think. And if there are funds available, I would advocate for something to be done to protect the playground space. And then I had a question about the middle school air quality situation, as I've heard a lot of concern about this as kids are getting back to school and concerns about mold. I know this is partially not under your purview, but with the sixth grade academy, I wonder if there is a way for us to get more information on that, if there are studies being done or if there's information that we can have access to related to the air quality. I think that's a big concern for constituents.

I can follow up on both of those items.

Okay. Thank you.

Lynn, questions?

Actually, this also came up at our District 2 meeting, although it's not District 2. The status of the East Street sidewalk

east pleasant pleasant street sidewalk thank you paul yeah so the i believe that the engineering for that sidewalk has been done um i will i need to get a better for me to get an update from dpw but i know that they've done i believe they've done the survey work in the engineering now it's going to be a funding a funding challenge i look forward to more optic thank you thank you jennifer top questions of the manager

Yes, so I was, before Kathy spoke, going to, I am not a pickleballer, but wanted to, you know, ensure that those public comments, you know, aren't lost. It seems that there's a lot we can't do for residents, but providing some pickleball courts, or painting that court, at least one, is something we could do. I also want to ask for the finance, sorry, it's really not town manager, but will we get a report from the town manager or the finance committee on library finances and status of the capital campaign?

Kathy? Tomorrow's report, Sean has put a piece of information into the packet, but a series of questions have been posed and he was going to get answers from the library director on them. So there are two parts to this, one is, we're taking out short-term loans to cover the gap. And because of where interest rates have been, we actually timed it well. We got some breaks because we got these loans, but they're one year, and so they come due. And so the faster the library pays off its fees, the less we have to borrow. So Sean has that piece to talk about, and then he has how much is owed, how much does the project have, including what contingency is left in the building project itself. So those questions have not been answered yet. He had the questions, and we'll get those tomorrow. And so the finance committee report out of that meeting will then have more information than you'll find in the packet right now.

Councillor Ryan, you have another question for the town manager?

I'm afraid I do. Paul, can you confirm that Traffic Eden has not occurred at Amethyst Brook School? What I've been hearing is that the steps that were taken by DPW and others have been successful and that traffic is relatively speaking flowing well both in the morning and in the afternoon at the school. Is that a fairly accurate assessment or not?

I think from talking to the schools and talking to the police, that is the case. We're also finding we had set up three different satellite areas for people to park in. The site on Belchertown Road is really not being used at all. I think there's one or two people using the site that we set up on at the corner of Northeast and Pelham Road or Main Street. But people are using the East Street School parking lot, and we created two lanes of parking on that side of the street, so that's been pretty successful. Most of the people are trying to park on the site, and they have a buddy system where you lock somebody in, and then they have names on it, so you know who you're parked behind. So if someone has to leave before you, you have to move your car so they can get their car out, and that's until we get through the demolition, that's going to be the way it works. And I think people are choosing to be closer to the school than park farther away and have sort of more independence.

Excuse me. People are not observing any kind of pedestrian or bike issues, it seems to be. I mean, cars seem to be doing okay, which is good. But how about the kids on bikes and people walking? You're not getting any reports from anyone?

I haven't heard anything from anybody or from the schools yet. All right. That won't happen. I hope we don't. That's the hope. Thank you.

Thank you. I just want to say this came up a little bit on Friday, George, and at least one parent said traffic moved much better getting her kid in and out than she expected. And the when the construction moves, there's 170 parking spaces, you know, so right now it's the shortage. But all there was a separate discussion on parking that people said it's just it's exceeded their expectation on not being difficult.

Thank you. We are going to move on to item 13, town council comments. We start with the president's report. My report is in the packet. I will accept any questions for it. Please read it. I also want to remind people it's been brought to my attention from a counselor that on our hybrid meetings and remote meetings if you attend remotely the town manager's remote participation policy actually requires if you're attending by a method that has a video connection and you are capable of a video connection that that video connection must be turned on so i want to bring that to people's attention it was just brought to my attention that that policy that the manager adopted that applies to us does say that the four towns meeting is the 26th we will post an agenda once the agenda is posted if we can we'll post it beforehand if we don't see it in time but um to ensure that if the council has a majority um a quorum that we can call it as a council meeting um and i want to mention for a president's report it was not in mind the mmca from the mma the mass municipal counselors association is having a regional meeting on friday the 25th it is in newberry port which is far it starts at eight in the morning which means an early meeting but it is on adus and people will be talking about adus which i believe is a very hot topic in this town which brings me to the future agenda item section which i'll go into and then i'll take the hands that that are up um There is probably going to be a number of proposals for ADU by-law changes coming to the council from various locations. I'm going to be working to figure out how to manage that conversation since they're all zoning by-law proposals and we probably don't want to send four different zoning by-law changes to public hearing. So please get them to us as soon as possible. Agenda setting is tomorrow morning at 9 AM. But the meeting is in two weeks, so we won't set that agenda and finalize it till next Tuesday morning. But having them in hand as soon as possible will help us try and figure out how to manage that conversation at a meeting, since I know a lot of people are thinking about that. The other big item on the 28th for discussion, and then there's a couple of smaller things, is the UMass Strategic Partnership Agreement expires next June in 2027, which means the conversations renegotiating that SPA will begin soon. um in speaking with the town manager we are planning to put a council discussion of council goals for the spa council ideas for the spa and the negotiations going forward at the meeting on the 28th so be thinking about your thoughts on that because that discussion will be there and i suspect it might take a while because i suspect 13 counselors have a lot of thoughts on that so those are going to probably be the two things that take up a lot of time on the 28th of september questions and then counselor comments after that. We start with Sam McLeod.

Thank you, Mandy, and thank you, Paul, both for your reports. They're helpful and informative. Question, Mandy, you referenced state-owned roads in Amherst. It's the two main ones that at some point in time, I gather, Amherst acquired the responsibility for them. I clicked on the link that was provided. It's kind of interesting. And the ones that I'm referring to are the corner by the administration or former administration building of Amherst College Route 9 going towards Belchtown and that same location going towards Atkins. Is there any chance in the future for reverting back to state control of those roads and why Why wouldn't we? And you may not have the answers now, but it seems like it would be nice to have the state take care of the roads.

I do not have that answer. I do not know if Paul knows if we can request the state to take them back over.

yes we can ask them to take them back over typically what happens is the same thing that you do as a council when you're asked to take over a road you want it brought up to state standard you want to bring up to your subdivision standards whatever standards we have for a road before we accept it they would probably my guess is that they would say you bring it up to our state standards and then we will accept it before we don't want to take up a you know crummy road but we can ask

Hold on. You need to use a mic. You have a follow-up question.

Just a comment. It would be interesting to see what would be required to achieve that end. My guess is it may be too expensive, I infer from your comments, but you never know. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Wouldn't it be nice?

I will mark down, but you'll need to produce, if you want the council to discuss this and I hesitate to give Paul duties and time of staff work without a council vote, please produce a memo under the charter section 2.7 to ask the council to request information from Paul for that. You can contact me and I will help you navigate that process if you would like, because I would like, it sounds like it would take a lot of time for that information you're requesting, so that should follow the charter sections. to seek information on that. We can talk afterwards, but that would be the process for getting that on council agenda. Councillor Cano-Martin. Oh, okay, we'll wait for you then, Cathy Shane.

Yeah, I hope people read Mandy's very accurate description of the meeting we had with the UMass higher-ups, where they had a map on a wall, which we weren't given to take away from us on where they're potentially going to build. while they're taking down other buildings. The disturbing take home was these will be structured so they are not taxable, even though we asked about, well, Lowell has some taxable properties and Connecticut has done it. And they said, well, this is the way they're going to be structured. Secondly, that they're coming online is very expensive. Well, yeah, because it's a private developer. They're taking risk and they expect to make a profit. So my take home, Mandy, and I ask, is the state aware of, because it's underfunding repair and maintenance of buildings, it's now pushed out this, let's just go out to the private sector and turn over the welfare of our students. Can we bring it up to Mindy and Joe's level? So I wanted to, it's hard to figure out how we articulate that. Mandy raised that the governor has said maybe we should de-assess some public land and pointed out a couple of the properties that would be ideal to turn it over to a developer. So it's private, private, private for faculty housing, for whatever. And they said, we're not prepared to do anything like that right now. But that's an interesting idea. So it was we had the bigwigs in the room, I would say major voices. But the message from them is we're going to do it. And it's a phased approach. It's it's a decade long. The disturbing piece of this is they might structure. a redo of the hotel in a way that we don't get the hotel restaurant. We don't get the little bit of revenue we get out of that. You know, so it was worth we're thinking only of this is a way of getting capital renovation, repair dollars and shifting the risk off of us. So I think it was disturbing. And then just I know a person who's one of the central architectural planning and she's really worried that they're taking down buildings rather than renovating them and not thinking about carbon footprint and the bone structure and the way they're doing it and the private developers in their interest to rebuild a whole building. So her comment actually is, I'm hoping I'll be retired before I see the consequence of all of this.

Thank you. Pam Rooney. Thank you. I wanted to express appreciation for the strong language with the folks from UMass that, in fact, we are interested in taxable opportunities. So thank you for making that statement very clearly. If one looks at the contract that was signed to build Fieldstone, it is very, very, very clear that the corporation that does that work covers their covers their backside completely in terms of not not being taxable and to the to the point that they will that they will litigate the university, should the university even think about helping us find a way to tax those properties. It is so tightly written by the corporation. I'm just gonna rant for a second. So not only did the corporation get assistance from the university in terms of some of the utility work that was done for Fieldstone, They did not have to pay for the land for Fieldstone. They are charging service fees, not rent. And so all of these factors are in their favor. Oh, and they didn't have to pay state tax on building construction materials. All of these factors should have brought in a product that was much more affordable than anything anybody could possibly imagine and it was not as as was pointed out it is one of the most expensive properties in the town so it's um um i would love legislative assistance on on keeping the pressure on that it's a big corporation they know exactly how to twist those words thank you our mantra during the meeting was revenue generation for the town

multiple ways it was said multiple ways uh jennifer tubb i did want to ask someone to ask this before is there a follow-up how is it left will this be your regular conversation or

so my understanding of the request for the meeting was that this was in some sense a one-time update on the meeting although at the same time they said they would continue to update us this is the first time we've had one it's been months since they signed it i don't know when the next request for a meeting for an update would be paul may have more information but this was clearly not the semesterly required meeting under the spa so there will be another meeting sometime this semester under the spa many of the same individuals will be there and We will definitely put that on the agenda. Again, revenue is one of our recurring themes. So it wouldn't be specific to the P3 that meeting, but yeah.

But would it be good to have the P3s be a regular, you know? It'll be on the agenda.

It will be on the agenda anytime we meet with the chancellor or UMass staff. Paul, do you have anything to add to that? Okay. And we've got counselor Ken O'Martin. We're on to counselor comments, I believe.

Okay yeah I just wanted to put in a plug for craig's doors um we got an invitation to our Council email they're having their 15th anniversary celebration on Wednesday September 23 from four to six at mill river. And I couldn't make it so I asked for a separate tour which sherry the director had offered and I did get to go. I toured their resource center, which is over at Emanuel, not Emanuel, it's the other church, the Baptist Church, and then went over to the other space at Emanuel, and I saw both spaces. And they're providing really incredible services. The resource center provides food, provides clothing items, provides survival gear, a mail service, some case management. So they're doing an incredible amount of stuff. They said they're serving about 600 different people. out of that site they've seen 600 individuals they currently have 30 shelter beds at the Emanuel Church and they are you know hoping to expand that because there's definitely enough need they're always full and they also want to add on to the facilities they have at the Emanuel Church and so I know they need a lot of support I would love to see like how we as a town could support them more and I think a good first step is going and touring and getting to see what they're doing so just plug thank you any further counselor comments

Seeing none, there aren't any unanticipated topics. There is no executive session. So I move to adjourn. Is there a second? I think that was Pam Rooney seconding that. We start with Jennifer Taub. Yes. Councillor Walker is absent. Councillor Brevik. Yes. Councillor Kenna Martin. Yes. Andy Churchill.

Yes.

Ana Devangafie. Aye. Lynn Griesemer. Aye. Mandy Johanicki is an aye. Councillor Lord. Aye. Aye.