BOARD OF SELECTMEN

MAY 23, 2006

Present: Paul T. Reidy, Chairman; Shawn Harris, Richard W. Murray, Joseph P. Norton, Paul T. Reidy

Richard H. Agnew, Town Administrator

Press: Scituate Mariner

1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM.

2. ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA/ WALK-IN PERIOD

Mr. Harris made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen VOTE to ACCEPT the Agenda for May 23, 2006. SECONDED by Mr. Norton. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

There were no walk-ins this evening.

4. VOTE/ Electronic Game License/ “The Pub” at Widow’s Walk Golf Course

Mr. Agnew stated that a “Golden Tee” golf game was installed at “The Pub” at Widow’s Walk and requires an Electronic Game License from the Selectmen. He further stated that this would be the only electronic game in “The Pub”.

Mr. Norton made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen VOTE to GRANT an Electronic Game License to James Miller d/b/a “The Pub At Widow’s Walk”, 250 Driftway. SECONDED by Mr. Harris. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

5. ANNOUNCEMENT/ Harbor “Clean Up” Day

Mr. Murray announced that a Harbor “Clean Up” Day would occur on Saturday, May 27, 2006 from 9:30 AM to 2:30 PM. Mr. Noble and Mr. Patterson from the Harbormaster’s Office have been instrumental in organizing this effort. The Department of Public Works has offered their assistance, as well. Mr. Murray encouraged volunteers to participate.

5. 7:05 PM/ AWARD/ Sale of Town Owned Property/ South Shore Habitat for Humanity

Mr. John Ritsher, member of the Board of Directors for the South Shore Habitat for Humanity, was present at tonight’s meeting. Mr. Agnew stated that this bid went out under the guidelines of Chapter 30b of Massachusetts General Laws. One bid was received from South Shore Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Agnew recommends that the Town sell this property to Habitat for Humanity for $1.00. Mr. Reidy noted a letter the Board recently received from an abutter to the property. The abutter is receptive to the idea of a Habitat for Humanity home at this site and offers some constructive suggestions. Mr. Reidy will forward the letter to Mr. Ritsher.

Mr. Harris asked how individuals qualify for such a home? Resident versus non-resident, single parent, etc. Mr. Ritsher stated that unless the Town has imposed a restriction to allow only Scituate residents to apply, the application would be opened up to the entire south shore area. All applicants would be interviewed and they must earn 25% to 30% of the lower median income level.

Additionally, Habitat for Humanity asks that a family put some “sweat equity” into the new home. Habitat for Humanity really tries to choose the family who they consider to be the “most needy” in terms of housing. Mr. Pollard and Mr. Agnew concurred that Scituate had restricted applicants to Scituate residents only.

Mr. Murray made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen AWARD the Request for Proposal for Town owned land to: South Shore Habitat for Humanity, 28 River Street, Braintree, Massachusetts. SECONDED by Mr. Harris. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

6. VOTE/ Permission/ Annual Knights of Columbus Carnival/ B. Limbacher

Mr. Bill Limbacher, Knights of Columbus, stated that the Knights are requesting permission to hold their annual Carnival on Cole Parkway in July. The Carnival operator will be the same as last year. The Carnival will be set up on Monday, July 10th and inspections will occur the same day. The Carnival will actually open on Tuesday, July 11th. Mr. Limbacher will meet with all the Department heads involved with Carnival activities. Firework displays will be held on Friday and Saturday evenings.

Mr. Norton made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen VOTE to GRANT permission to the Knights of Columbus to hold their annual Carnival on July 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th, 2006 at Cole Parkway. The Carnival will open each evening at 7:00 PM and there will be firework displays at 11:00 PM on Friday and Saturday evenings. Set up to begin on Monday, July 10th with no vehicles or trailers parked on Cole Parkway prior to that date. All insurance certificates must be filed with the Town Administrator’s office one month prior to the event and all conditions set by police, fire and building inspector’s departments must be met. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

7. ANNOUNCEMENT/ Vacancies on Boards/ Committees/ Commissions & Councils

Mr. Reidy read the list of vacancies and asked the newspapers to publish the list, as well. All applications should be forwarded to the Selectmen’s office by June 9th and appointments will be made on June 20th.

8. PROCLAMATION/ “Buckle Up Scituate Week”

Mr. Murray read the document proclaiming the week of May 29th as “Buckle Up Scituate Week”, which denotes the importance of seat belts.

Mr. Pollard asked about a list of initiatives that will be undertaken by the Police Department during this special week? Mr. Agnew will ask Chief Stewart to provide the list.

9. DISCUSSION/ VOTE/ POLE PETITION #24104/ Gannett Road/ cont. from 6/7/06

This item will be postponed to the Selectmen’s June 6th meeting because some of the abutters could not be present this evening.

10. PRESENTATION/ Rampantly Creative/ S. Coyle/ Egypt Park

Ms. Coyle presented a packet of information summarizing this project to date. She has worked closely with Mr. Norton, Mr. Pollard and former Ombudsman, Ms. Susan Phippen, on Egypt Park. It became apparent three years ago that there would be substantial changes to the Egypt Park area with the return of the Greenbush Line. Ms. Phippen approached the neighbors regarding what they would like to see happen in this area. Park space was a common “wish” among the neighbors. Green spaces increased as the intersection narrowed. Six months after the initial meeting with neighbors, the Town contracted with Ms. Coyle to develop a plan for the area. It was also noted that a memorial for Scituate resident, Sean Powell, was located at this intersection. Most of the plans, to date, center around the northern area of property. The theme was to keep it “simple” and open. The residents asked for benches and natural screening from the MBTA infrastructure. Ms. Coyle highlighted some of the plan’s details for the Board. A wooden pavilion, planters, low growing perennials, additional parking spaces for the Egypt Country Store, trees and a low stonewall were some of the items mentioned. Discussion continued on cost estimates being based on market value. Ms. Coyle feels the prices are realistic. Ms. Coyle has presented the plans to Ombudsman, Al Bangert, as well. He has spoken to her about a “phased” approach. Discussion continued on funding some of this project via Community Preservation Act monies.

Mr. Pollard believes some of the estimates appear to be very high, but he understands this is Ms. Coyle’s business and she knows what items cost. He feels this is a very good project left. Ms. Coyle stated that her estimates are a little on the high side, but she has found that it is better to start on the high side and then when cuts are made – there is still a worthwhile project. The planting estimates are according to wholesale nursery prices. The hardscape prices were taken from a recent “cost estimator’s” book. Mr. Murray complimented Ms. Coyle on the beautiful plans for this area. He suggests that a kiosk be added to provide information on the historical nature of this area. Old photographs of the train could be displayed. The Town could possible apply for State funding for such a project. Mr. Harris asked if the owner of the Egypt Country Store had seen these most recent plans? Ms. Coyle stated that the owner had not seen this most recent plans, but he had seen her “hand drawn” plan. Ms. Coyle noted that Ms. Phippen had stressed the importance of meeting again with the neighborhood when the plans were finalized. Ms. Coyle intends to do that very soon. Mr. Reidy spoke with the owners of the Store this evening. The gas lines were just moved and they now extend to the curb rather than where the hydro seeding is located on the south side. They want to make certain that everyone knows where the gas lines are now located. Ms. Coyle has the MBTA’s plans and will make certain that everything is properly noted. Mr. Reidy stated that residents of Lawson Road are experiencing drainage problems. Apparently there used to be a working storm drain near the new crosswalk on Curtis Street that is no longer working. It appears that the old storm drain was capped and the excess water is not entering the new drain. He wants to make certain that all drainage problems are corrected prior to implementation of the Egypt Park plan. Ms. Coyle concurred.

Discussion continued regarding an application for CPA funds, Conservation permitting, etc. Mr. Reidy thanked Ms. Coyle for presenting the Egypt Park plans to the Board this evening.

11. DISCUSSION/ VOTE/ Doctors Hill Water Main

Mr. Michael O’Neil, Doctors Hill developer, Mr. Anthony Antoniello, Director of the Department of Public Works, Mr. Gene Babin, Supervisor/ Water Division, and Mr. William Limbacher, Planning Board, were present at tonight’s meeting. Mr. Antoniello explained that the Department of Public Works recommended that the water main be “looped” at the Doctors Hill development. They made this a requirement to preserve the development’s level of water quality. It was suggested that the developer bring in the water from Route 3A, loop it through a piece of private property and hook up to Christopher Wren Road. To date, the developer has not been able to get an easement from the owner of the private property and the system is not looped. An impasse has been reached. The Planning Board holds a surety bond on this development. Mr. Antoniello and Mr. Paul Scott, Supervisor of the Engineering Division, recommend that the Town take the private property needed for looping the water main by eminent domain. Any expenses associated with the “taking” could be charged to the developer’s surety bond. The eminent domain article could be ready for the next Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Antoniello stated that the only other way to get this system looped is very expensive and involves going back out to the Route 3A water main.

Mr. O’Neil distributed a “handout” to the Board with additional facts on this situation. He explained that the water main “looping” was a “provision” under the Special Permit for this development. The developer “has done everything required under the Special Permit” according to their (developer’s) legal counsel. The developer brought the water main up to the northern line of the development three to four years ago. At that time, they could have run the line over to Williamsburg Lane – while the heavy equipment was on site. This did not occur. Mr. O’Neil believes it would be “impossible to connect to the Route 3A water main – the State will not give us a road opening cut and there is the matter of a ‘non-disturbance’ zone”. An easement from the property owner is not an option and when the developer approached the Town to take the property by eminent domain three years ago – “there was no interest”. The subdivision was completed two years ago, the landscaping is done and it cannot be “put to bed” due to this issue, which has been ongoing for one and half years. The developer contacted the Town Administrator in an effort to resolve this situation prior to moving to litigation on this matter. He believes that many of the residents do not want to connect three-year old water pipes to a thirty-year old water main. Mr. O’Neil noted that Rich Ferguson, Doctors Hill Homeowner’s Association, was present at tonight’s meeting.

Mr. Antoniello stated that the Department of Public Works recommended the looped water main for the development and when the Planning Board drew up the Special Permit they added the words “if feasible” – after the “looped” water main. The Town needs to insure that the water supply to the subdivision is “very good”. The first time Mr. Antoniello heard about the possibility of taking the property by eminent domain was very recently. Mr. Murray asked whose notes were written down in the margins of the distributed document? No one seemed to know. Mr. Murray would like to hear from the Homeowner’s Association.

Mr. Limbacher stated that it was the intent of the Planning Board to include the looping of the water main in the Special Permit to insure the quality of the water in terms of a Public Safety issue. It is something the Planning Board looks into for all their subdivisions. The developer has attended several Planning Board meetings and smaller meetings between members and the developer have occurred, as well. It seems that we are at the litigation point now. The Planning Board wants the water main to be looped and he believes they would not object to a taking via eminent domain. Mr. Limbacher believes that there was originally an agreement with the private property owner for an easement. The property owner passed away and the estate will not go forward with the easement. The easement is “no longer enforceable”. Optimally, the water should be looped within the development itself.

Mr. Pollard asked if the Planning Board documented what they think should take place regarding this issue? Mr. Limbacher stated that the issue was “discussed” during Planning Board meetings. Mr. Antoniello stated that he has presented numerous documents that refer to looping the water main. Mr. Reidy asked for clarification on the Planning Board’s language. Mr. Atnoniello stated that the words the Board inserted were “if feasible” – those were not DPW’s words. Discussion continued on the eminent domain taking being the most economical way to solve the problem at this point. Mr. Harris asked for clarification on the private property issue. Mr. O’Neil explained that when an easement was spoken about with the original property owner five years ago – it was a “relatively easy” thing. Since that time, the property owner died and the heirs have offered no legal possibility to move forward. Mr. Harris asked if the original, private property owner was the same person who developed Williamsburg Lane? Mr. O’Neil answered “yes”. Mr. Harris noted that the heirs could have a problem with the Town taking the property by eminent domain. Mr. O’Neil concurred and said the Town could end up with a “land damage suit”. Who will pay for such a lawsuit?

Mr. Babin stated that he is the licensed, water supply professional for the Town. He was “shocked” to learn that the developer has information from another professional that says the development’s water main does not have to be looped. That would be “contrary to any waterworks” data that he knows of. The Doctors Hill development was one of the first projects Mr. Babin worked on when he came to work for the Town. The looping of the water main will improve the subdivision’s water quality, improve fire integrity and provide a second source of water. He continually tries to improve Scituate’s water. The looping will do just that. Mr. Antoniello and Mr. Scott concurred with Mr. Babin’s summary. Mr. Babin has never seen a written document stating that an easement across the private property would not be available. He wonders about the possibility of crossing Route 3A at another location. He noted that the existing connection was made without a disruption in service. He agreed that the State often discourages road openings, but if they are threatened with litigation – they often will “find a way”. He believes taking the property by eminent domain is a good plan “B”. Mr. Reidy asked if the water main crossing Route 3A would go over to Old Forge Road? Mr. Babin answered “yes”. Mr. Babin continued by stating that he would recommend entering north of the current connection if an easement is “truly not available”. Mr. Norton asked if one of these options, (1) eminent domain taking or (2) Route 3A connection would be the course of action? Mr. Babin answered “yes”.

Mr. Rich Ferguson, President of the Homeowners Association, stated that his group has concerns about “liability issues”. He understands that the Association is made up of “lay people”, but the Special Permit was issued by the Planning Board and must be enforced by the Town. Mr. Harris asked how people purchased these units when the project was technically not complete? Mr. Agnew stated that there is a “cloud” on each property title because the Planning Board has not “signed off” on the development’s Special Permit. Mr. Ferguson noted that the development is not complete at this point in time. Mr. Norton asked if the developer has correspondence between himself and the private, property owner (estate) stating that an easement will not be granted. Mr. O’Neil answered “yes” and continued by stating that the Planning Board has been aware of this situation for four years. Everything is on file in the Planning Board office. Mr. Agnew hopes that in the future, the Planning Board will not release any house lots in a development until water main looping is complete. Building should not have commenced until the looping was complete at Doctors Hill. Mr. Harris asked for an opinion from Town Planner, Ms. Laura Harbottle. He feels the Board is in a “tough spot” here. Ms. Harbottle feels that the Planning Board is in “just a tough a spot as everyone else”. She stated that the Planning Board could not control what was going on at the private property (Bongarzone). Ms. Harbottle stated that the DPW would be the agency to approve the water system. The DPW can require anything they want prior to turning on the water. It was the Planning Board’s intention that the water be looped. The Board did not see connecting in with Christopher Wren road as an option. Those residents were not part of the Doctors Hill subdivision and conditions could not be placed upon their property.

Mr. O’Neil stated that various Town departments make comments on subdivisions. The written decision on the subdivision is governed by these comments. No plan shows the looping of the water main and looping is not discussed in the decision. He continued by stating that the DPW’s comments are “policy statements”. The developer is “governed” by the written language. “If it is not on the plans, it is not in the decision”. “We are not required to do it.” Mr. O’Neil stated that Mr. Antoniello
“signed off” on this decision. Mr. Antoniello stated that the developer had informed him that he had an easement agreement and a price for it. Then the property owner died. Mr. O’Neil stated that he had forwarded all the aforementioned documents to Mr. Scott in an effort to move forward.

Mr. Murray sees this situation as being solved by one of three options; (1) loop to Williamsburg Lane, (2) loop to Route 3A or (3) Town does nothing. He is uncertain that the eminent domain taking is a good course of action. He noted that if the water main is looped to Williamsburg Lane, private property would have to be crossed. He is also not certain that money to cover these types of expenses can legally be taken from the surety bond. Mr. Agnew stated that if the development is left the way it is, the Planning Board still needs to “sign off” on the Special Permit. At that point the titles would become “clear”. He reminded that the Selectmen, as Water Commissioners, could determine that the water main does not have to be looped. Some homeowners might not be happy with this latter plan.

Mr. Harold Tuttle, trustee at Doctors Hill, stated that he had met with Mr. Babin and suggested another option regarding a narrow strip of property along Country Way. He spoke to the developer several times about this option and was told it was too expensive. Mr. O’Neil stated that the Country Way option would require the eminent domain taking of a private residence on Elm Street in addition to crossing Conservation land. Mr. Agnew agreed that there are a lot of wetlands to be considered in this particular option. Mr. Limbacher stated that the Selectmen are being left with the impression that the water main looping is the only problem with this subdivision – that is not true. It is only one of several items that need to be corrected prior to “signing off”. Discussion continued on sidewalks and streetlights, etc. Mr. Reidy asked how the residents have water when the subdivision is incomplete? Mr. Agnew stated that the Planning Board releases lots to build on once the infrastructure gets to a certain point. Once the lots are built on, the Building Inspector’s office issues the permits.

Mr. Reidy asked why the main was not looped at the time the developer had his equipment on site? Mr. O’Neil stated that they did not have the easement at that time. Mr. Agnew does not believe that taking the property by eminent domain is a good option. The complications and expense will be enormous. His suggestion is to leave the situation as is, or let it go to court and the judge will make a decision. These suggestions may not make everyone happy, but it will be the least expensive route. Mr. Norton noted that even if the Board decides the main must be looped right now, the developer will still go to court. Mr. Murray asked if any water or fire violations are in effect in regard to this development right now? Mr. O’Neil stated that “no system has been signed off on”. Mr. Babin stated that water pressure and flow are within the guidelines set forth for residential properties. He continued by stating that if a break occurs on Route 3A the development will not have water pressure or any water at all because the system is not looped. Mr. Norton asked if the residents of Doctors Hill have a problem with flow and pressure at this time? An answer to this question was not recorded. Mr. Frank Sheehan, 24 Doctor’s Hill, stated that he got involved with the subdivision “early on” and understood that the water system would be looped. He understood that an arrangement for the looping had been made with the Bongarzone family, but that the “agreement” did not carry on to the estate. He believes it is a “best management practice” to loop the system. The system is new and is good at this time. Eventually, when sediments and contaminants build up, the system will have to be purged. He noted other lawsuits with the developer concerning drainage issues. He further noted other items that the developer has not corrected. Mr. Reidy asked the residents if they ultimately wanted this issue to go to court? Mr. Sheehan answered “absolutely”. Mr. Agnew believes the court “route” is the only choice in this matter. Mr. Reidy concurred and stated that this matter is really not an issue for the Selectmen to decide.

Mr. Norton asked the developer if he intends to address the other issues Mr. Sheehan brought up? Mr. O’Neil answered “yes, but mostly it is a sidewalk issue”. Mr. Ferguson, 37 Doctor’s Hill, stated that when he bought his property he thought the development’s infrastructure was complete, ie. the water was looped. He wants the Town and the Planning Board to enforce the Special Permit. Discussion continued on whether the Special Permit states that the water system must be looped. Mr. Ferguson believes it does not state that in the Special Permit. Mr. Murray thanked everyone for coming forward to the Selectmen with this issue. It appears there needs to be further dialogue between the developer and the Homeowners Association. Mr. Pollard asked if the Planning Board had ever written “looping” into one of their Special Permits? Mr. Limbacher answered “yes”. Mr. O’Neil believes it could be written in if the looping goes over the development’s property – not someone else’s property. Mr. Reidy reminded that this issue was brought to the Selectmen in their capacity as Water Commissioners.

13. DISCUSSION/ VOTE/ Water Rates

Mr. Agnew referenced a recent memorandum from Mr. Babin requesting a change in the water rates. A rate increase is needed due to an increase in the water rates the Town of Marshfield is charging Scituate. It is a 4.3% increase. Mr. Reidy asked if we know what Marshfield’s water rate is? Mr. Agnew answered “yes” and noted that the Town of Scituate has been receiving water from Marshfield for several years without a signed agreement. Mr. Reidy asked if Scituate has a current water bill from Marshfield? Mr. Agnew answered “yes”. Marshfield increased their rates late in the fiscal year (December). Scituate received their bill on December 20, 2005. Mr. Murray asked if the rate increase would be passed along to all Scituate residents? Yes. Mr. Agnew stated that the Board needs to increase the rates or risk not being able to set the tax rate. Mr. Murray has concerns about Marshfield raising their rates again. Mr. Agnew stated that Marshfield raised rates for other neighboring towns to which they provide water and Marshfield residents, as well. Mr. Agnew stated that the December 2005 bill was paid based upon “old” rates until an agreement could be reached between the towns. If voted, Scituate residents will see in the increase on their July 2006 water bill. Mr. Reidy asked when Scituate went to a “tiered” water billing system. Mr. Babin believes the tier system went into effect in 2002 or 2003. Mr. Reidy asked if the first year the tiered system went into effect – did the Water Department realize a “windfall” in increased revenues? Mr. Babin stated that it was not a “windfall”. Mr. Agnew stated that the rates are based upon consumption – “some bills went up and some bills went down”. Mr. Reidy noted the water conservation aspect of the system promoted by the State – if you use less water, you pay less. He further stated that it takes people “lag time” to figure this out – he thought there would be a “bounce” in receipts.

Ms. Rosemary Dobie, Humarock, stated that there have been problems with the “tiered system”. Water meter readings were not done every three months and the rate jumps “tremendously” if the meter is read at four months. She has found that the bills have become more consistent over time and assumes that a concerted effort has been made to read the meters every three months rather than randomly. Mr. Babin stated that the Water Department attempts to read the meters at twelve to fourteen week intervals. Mr. Pollard remembers seeing a large jump in his water bill when the Town went to a tiered system. He reminded Mr. Agnew that the Board would prefer to look at rates on a regular basis rather than being presented with one large increase.

Mr. Murray made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen APPROVE the Water Rates proposed by the Water Division Supervisor in a memorandum dated May 2, 2006. SECONDED by Mr. Harris. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

13. GENERAL DISCUSSION/ VOTE/ Transfer Station

Mr. Agnew stated that he and Mr. Harris held additional meetings on suggested changes at the Transfer Station. They agree that the Board should approve most of the items suggested in Mr. Antoniello’s memorandum. Bulky Waste and “Take It or Leave It” will relocate to one area. Any vehicle wishing to enter the area will have to pay $5.00. All pick up trucks will be weighed on the scale. Mr. Harris summarized by stating that “the Town will get paid for everything that comes through the gate”. He further noted that these changes would not take place “overnight”. Mr. Reidy noted that station wagons loaded up with bulky waste should go over the scale – not just pick up trucks. Mr. Murray believes that all vehicle types should be weighed. He is not comfortable with the suggested increase in the bag price. Mr. Norton asked if the bag price is increased and a surplus is realized at the end of the year – could the bag price be reduced? Mr. Agnew answered “yes”. The Department of Public Works can furnish the Board with a monthly printout on bag revenues and expenses. Mr. Reidy believes the fifty percent price increase is an “easy answer” to the Transfer Station deficit. This appears to be the same logic Marshfield uses when increasing their water rates. A Transfer Station employee told Mr. Reidy what needs to be done there to increase revenues. Mr. Reidy then passed along this information to the DPW Administration who in turn said this particular employee always says “the sky is falling”. Mr. Norton noted that if the scale had been used for the past two years, the Transfer Station might not be in the position it is right now. Mr. Pollard is not comfortable with some of the suggested changes at the Transfer Station. He asked if the RFP is out right now for the bag contract? Mr. Agnew answered “yes”. Mr. Pollard requested a copy of that RFP for the Board. Did a prior bag vendor forward a letter to the Town regarding overpayment on last year’s bag contract? If so, Mr. Pollard would like a copy of that letter. It is his understanding that the Town is overpaying for bags. Discussion continued on a job description for the new, supervisor’s position at the Transfer Station. Mr. Pollard thought that the current Supervisor’s pay was increased when he took on the responsibility of both the Transfer Station and the Highway Division. Mr. Pollard stated that “it’s nothing personal, but maybe the Town will need to look at a salary adjustment for this person”. He suggested that some changes be made and closely monitored for the next three months. Mr. Agnew reminded that the Board needs to vote in order to set the tax rate.

Mr. Murray understands the need to set the tax rate, but is still uncomfortable with the bag component. He would like to see other “creative” ideas explored such as privatization. He believes that the deficit should be decreased and closely monitored over the next several months. Mr. Harris asked what the Board thought the average weight of a filled, blue trash bag is? Mr. Reidy thought approximately ten pounds. Mr. Harris noted that the Town pays four cents per pound to dispose of it. Mr. Norton asked if the new supervisory position is included in what is being voted? Mr. Agnew stated that the position is included, but does not have to be voted this evening. Mr. Norton stated that he has a problem with voting a new position when this enterprise fund is running at a deficit. Mr. Agnew encouraged the Board to vote on the Bulky Waste/ Take It or Leave It item. Mr. Reidy believes if the prices are increased, Scituate residents would do better to call a private company to pick up their trash. Mr. Murray suggested raising prices, if necessary, after using the scale on a consistent basis for the next three months. Mr. Norton encouraged Mr. Agnew and Mr. Harris to look at privatization again. Mr. Agnew stated that SEAMASS and two smaller companies have looked at the operation and had no interest. Mr. Harris stated that the Town of Plymouth has three transfer stations. Their bulky waste operation is handled by BFI at $160/ton. If we go that route “we are right back to square one”. He noted that Scituate is not alone in having problems with its Transfer Station, Cohasset is also having problems. He noted the steep increase in price for the Town to get rid of its trash. Mr. Pollard believes that if everyone is using the scale, we should see an increase in revenues. Mr. Agnew expects the April 2006 figures very soon and May 2006 will be available in a
couple of weeks. It was agreed that Mr. Agnew would ask for prices “informally” from private companies regarding the operation of the Transfer Station. He will look into the following prices: (1)
curbside pick up, (2) just c & d, and (3) running the entire Transfer Station. Mr. Pollard stated that the ultimate goal is to keep the cost down for residents disposing of trash. Ms. Dobie stated that in North Carolina residents put all refuse into one, large barrel which is wheeled to the curb for pick up. They pick up larger items twice a year. The system works very well.

14. GENERAL DISCUSSION/ VOTE/ CONTRACTS/ R. Murray

Mr. Murray suggests that all contracts in excess of $25,000 go out to bid. Mr. Agnew stated that this would be easy for the Town to do, but may delay projects by a month or so. Mr. Murray wants to make certain that this would include all engineering contracts. Mr. Agnew suggested adding this wording to an existing Selectmen’s Policy. It was agreed that a draft policy would be presented at the Board’s next meeting.

15. OTHER BUSINESS

Mr. Murray thanked the Fire Department and all other departments who assisted residents during the recent, extreme rain events. The Department of Public Works did a “great job” opening the gates at Musquashicut Pond.

Mr. Murray thanked Mr. Agnew and the Department of Public Works for their assistance in the recent Third Cliff area “clean up” effort.

Mr. Reidy reminded everyone of the Memorial Day Parade on Monday, May 29, 2006. The Parade leaves Town Hall at approximately 10:30 AM and travels to the Town Common.

Mr. Murray noted that the Recreation Commission sent a letter thanking Mr. Wally Foster, Foster Rigging, for donating his time and materials to the Town’s sailing program.

16. CORRESPONDENCE

Mr. Murray read a letter from Chief Brian Stewart, Scituate Police Department, regarding the Department’s new K-9 dog. Mr. Pollard asked for more details. Mr. Agnew assured that the dog will not be used for enforcement, but will used for missing persons and to find illegal drugs. Mr. Pollard asked if an increase in the Department’s budget would be necessary to cover expenses? Mr. Agnew does not believe so. Housing and veterinarian services are free and other items such as food will be donated. The officer training with the dog will receive $1,000 in specialist pay. The Town’s insurance company is “fine” with the dog being used for the aforementioned purposes.

17. MINUTES

Mr. Norton made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen VOTE to ACCEPT the Minutes of May 2, 2006 and May 16, 2006. SECONDED by Mr. Harris. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

18. ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Norton made a MOTION that the Board of Selectmen VOTE to ADJOURN the Meeting at 10:20 PM. SECONDED by Mr. Murray. No discussion. Unanimous vote. (5-0)

BOARD OF SELECTMEN

Paul T. Reidy, Chairman

Shawn Harris

Richard W. Murray

Joseph P. Norton

James E. Pollard

Respectfully submitted,

Kimberley A. Donovan
Secretary