Select Board Meeting — January 21, 2026

Good.

Okay, all set.

Thank you.

Welcome everybody to the select board meeting, Wednesday, January 21st, 2026, 6 PM, select board meeting room.

100 Peck Street, Seekonk.

Mass General Law Chapter 38, subsection 20F requires any person recording must notify the chair at the beginning of the meeting.

Is anybody recording?

Seeing no one, all select board meetings are recorded via audio and video and are broadcast live on Seekonk Channel 15.

I call the meeting to order at 6 PM.

Can we have a Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence, please?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Could somebody read the board and committee openings, please?

Whose turn is it?

Actually, I did it last time.

Someone else wants to read?

No?

Okay.

There you go.

All right.

We have lots of openings.

Boards and committees.

We are looking for volunteers on the Capital Improvement Committee.

We've got 4 board of selectmen and 3 moderator appointments.

Commission on Disability, 8 board of selectmen appointments.

Cultural Council, 2 board of selectmen appointments.

The Economic Development Committee is looking for 5 Board of Selectmen appointments.

Energy Committee needs 3 Board of Selectmen appointments.

Finance Committee has 1 moderator appointment.

Historical Commission, 3 Board of Selectmen appointments.

Parks and Recreation is looking for 1.

Recycling Committee, 1 Board of Selectmen appointment.

And the Zoning Board of Appeals is looking for 2 Board of Selectmen, 1 alternate and 1 regular.

That's it.

Thank you.

Consider the annual designation of Andrea Russo as animal control officer per Mass General Law Chapter 140, subsection 151.

So moved.

Second.

I didn't even ask if you considered yet.

Any questions?

Got a motion and a second.

Anybody have any questions?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing Seeing none, unanimous.

Thank you.

Don't go too far.

Consider the annual designation of Jessica Blake as Assistant Animal Control Officer per Mass General Law Chapter 140, subsection 151.

So moved.

Second.

I get a motion and a second.

Does anybody have any questions?

For those who are looking, this is Jessica Blake.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Thanks, Jessica.

Consider the annual designation of Ashley Lawrence as Assistant Animal Control Officer per Mass General Law Chapter 140, subsection 151.

Aye.

So moved.

Second.

I got a motion and a second.

Does anybody have any questions?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Thank you, Ashley, very much.

Consider accepting the animal control officer's warrant.

Miss Russo, nice to see you again.

Good evening.

Madam Chair, members of the board, Mr. Dean, in accordance with Massachusetts— hold the mic a little closer.

Sorry.

Thank you.

In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 140 as amended and foregoing warrant, I, Andrea Rusar, hereby make due return of my doings in compliance therewith as follows: number of dogs for the period of April 1st, 2025 to December 31st, 2025, um, 44 caught, 44 confined, 12 adopted, 26 claimed, 0 DOA.

1 euthanized, 5 in the shelter, 0 transferred, for a total of 44.

Number of cats for the period of April 1st, 2025 to December 31st, 2025: 72 caught, 62 confined, 40 adopted, 2 died, 6 claimed, 10 DOA, hit by car, 2 euthanized, 10 in the shelter, 0 in foster, 1 returned, 1 released, for a total of 72.

To the best of my knowledge and belief, all unlicensed dogs in said town of Seekonk has been caught, confined, killed, or adopted, sold.

And complaints have been made against the following named persons under the provisions of MGL Chapter 140 as amended.

Tickets written from April 1st, 2025 to December 31st, 2025, for non-criminal offenses.

For failure to license, 46 for $2,300.

Dog at large, first offense, 9 for $225.

Dog at large, second offense, 2 for $80.

Failure to vaccinate against rabies, 3 for $300.

Animal in vehicle in clement weather, 1 at $150.

Barking complaint And citation for one at $25.

Total tickets 62 for $3,080.

Total number of dogs licensed from April 1st, 2025 to December 31st, 2025, 1,982.

So far I had knowledge complaints have been entered against all persons who have failed to comply with said provisions.

Thank you.

Can I get a motion?

So moved.

Second.

Got a motion and a second.

Does anybody have any questions for Ms. Russo on this?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Thank you.

Consider accepting the list of donations in the amount of $2,649.62 to the Seekonk Animal shelter.

This list is from July 1st, 2025 to December 31st, '25, in the amount of $2,649.62.

I want to thank everybody who's donated.

Um, we appreciate everything they do.

Can I get a motion?

So moved.

Second.

I got a motion and a second.

Any questions for Miss Russo?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Consider the acceptance of a donation from Rocky's Ace Hardware in the amount of $599.19 to the Seekonk Animal Shelter.

Um, yes, so once again, Rocky's Ace Hardware did their 15th annual holiday pet roundup, and they managed to raise $599.19.

We thank them.

They think of us all the time.

We appreciate everything they do.

That's good.

Can I get a motion?

So moved.

Second.

Okay, a motion and a second.

Does anybody have any questions for Ms. Russo on this?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Community— thank you.

Good evening.

You too.

Thank you.

Community Speaks.

Somebody wants to come up and talk to me.

I know they do.

Come on.

Nope, just one of you is good.

Come on up, sir.

Just give us your name and your title and why you're here.

William Davis from the law firm Brainsky Levinson, 1539 Fall River Avenue.

I'm here to speak in favor of the billboard bylaw proposal and the billboard overlay district.

Okay, I'm going to ask the board, because he's here to talk about that and that is on the agenda, that we allow this gentleman and the other people that are going to talk when we discuss it on the agenda, that he'd be allowed to come and talk.

Sure.

Yeah, I think that'd be more advantageous than having him say his side now.

We'll get it all together.

Is that good for everyone?

Yeah.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

We'll see you again.

Anyone else from the community wish to speak?

Okay, seeing none.

General business public hearing.

Consider the request for an all-alcohol on-premises liquor license for Ugly Dumpling Seaconk LLC, doing business as Ugly Dumpling, to be located at 1105 Fall River Avenue, Seaconk, Mass.

Zhang Quanwen, owner.

Xianfen Wu, manager.

And I apologize if I pronounce them wrong.

I'll take a motion to enter into public hearing.

So moved.

Second.

At 6:09.

Okay, got a motion and a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, we are now in for public hearing.

Now, sir, tell me who you are.

I am Attorney Tyler Hensler, here on behalf of Ugly Dumpling Seaconch LLC, which will be doing business as the Ugly Dumpling.

Okay.

Joining me, just as way of introduction, is Xiaofeng Michael Wu, who is the manager of record, and Robert Massey, who's the regional GM for the company.

So Mr. Wu goes by Michael?

He does, he does.

Thank you.

Um, would the board, uh, like to hear a little bit, or would they, um— Yeah, we do.

Okay, great.

So, uh, as the board is aware, The Ugly Dumpling is applying for a new Section 12 restaurant license at this location.

The concept is a large space.

It's 7,900 square feet restaurant space that seats 246 people.

They will serve dim sum, Shanghai-style street food, and all different kinds of dumplings, which are handmade and fresh.

They will also offer a menu of beer, wine, and cocktails, hence the all-alcohol license request over beer and wine, that will pair with the menu items and be amenities to the, to the customers.

This is a primarily sit-down restaurant, not primarily a bar.

Um, but they will have takeout options available as well, as well as third-party app options.

There is plenty of parking in their lot for both dine-in and takeout customers, as well as the ability to have designated spaces for those deliveries.

Okay, sir, this is the old, um, TGI Fridays.

Thank you.

Yes, yes it is.

Just so that people listening and those of us— to orient yourself.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay, go ahead.

Yes.

Uh, so plenty of parking for, for the, the app, um, you know, delivery drivers, so there won't be an issue with, with traffic.

They are here, uh, for the long-term investment in the community.

Their lease is for a term of 15 years, and they're investing about $550,000 in build-out renovation costs in the space to make it modern, new, and welcoming.

Atmosphere.

Public need for a license is strong at this location.

This is unique, a unique concept for the area.

First of all, it's authentic Asian cuisine and a lively modern atmosphere.

This location, as just mentioned, used to be a TGI Friday's, so this board has actually found that public need existed in the past, and I would, I would posit that the same circumstances that existed for public need when that license was granted, uh, still exists today.

The character and fitness of the applicant is also very strong.

While this is their first Massachusetts operation, the ownership has locations that are successful in Fairfax and Richmond, Virginia, as well as one in Delaware.

And the franchise has 15 locations across New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Texas, as well as other states.

They've never had a violation or disciplinary matter related to alcohol of any kind, and they have a track record of working well within the communities which they serve.

Manager of record will be Michael Wu.

He is a U.S. citizen.

He's a Massachusetts resident.

He's familiar with the rules and regulations related to the sale and service of alcohol of this board, the ABCC, and the laws of the Commonwealth.

And he has experience in the industry, as he has been the head manager of Hook and Reel in Revere, Massachusetts, since 2018, and he's never received a violation or disciplinary action from the local board there or the ABCC.

Okay, sir, you've— you mentioned that they were going to spend some money on renovations and stuff.

Do they have a projected opening?

That would be an operations question.

Is there a projected opening?

We've been getting a lot of, uh, I've seen a lot of questions on social media, people wanting to know.

They've heard, where's it going, what is it, when's it opening, that type thing.

So we're here to answer all those questions.

Absolutely.

That's okay.

Does anybody— when you have it, just let me know.

Anybody on the board have any questions?

Oh, everything looks good.

No, this is a public hearing.

Does— is anybody here to talk in favor of this liquor license?

Is there anybody here that wants to talk against this liquor license?

Seeing no— seeing no one, I'll take a motion to close the public hearing at 6:14 PM.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor to close the public hearing?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

He's still scrolling, he doesn't have it yet.

Okay, who would like to make the motion to allow an all-liquor on-premise liquor license for Ugly Dumpling at 1105 Fall River Avenue?

So moved.

Second.

Okay, I got a motion and a second.

Does anybody else have any questions?

Of the general— I have a question to Sean.

Go ahead, Sean.

With disapproval, do we have to include that promissory note?

Uh, yes.

Okay, of $550,000, correct?

In the motion, can you just add that, Gary?

Sure.

So moved.

Second.

Is it being pledged?

It's not.

Oh, it's not being pledged.

Okay, sorry, it's a no-value license.

Okay, my mistake.

Okay, so your motion is good, your second is good.

Anybody else have any questions?

Of anyone?

Everybody good?

I would just say, if I may, welcome to Seacock and thank you for investing in our community.

Thank you.

Good luck.

And good luck.

And good luck.

Thank you.

Okay, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, passes unanimously.

Do you have that date for us?

I left my work— I'm sorry, I left my work.

No, that's okay.

I usually try to find out dates, so— sorry, February 23rd.

I just February 23rd, huh?

Okay, so people now won't have to keep talking about it on social media, and we have a prospective date.

Good luck to you.

Good luck to you.

Thank you.

Discussion regarding the placement of advertising billboards along Route 195.

Now let's just hold up a second for them.

John, I'll let you talk first.

You're a town employee, so go get— okay.

Uh, Madam Chair, members of the board, uh, we've been, uh, discussing this item.

I went back and kind of looked at my notes and checked in the files, uh, since 2023.

Uh, our last discussion was last May, I believe.

Uh, at that time we did not have a draft, uh, bylaw in hand.

Uh, Mr. Davis's office has provided that draft bylaw.

We took a look at that over the last few months, and now we've got the draft bylaw in front of us.

I did an analysis for the board kind of identifying a few items that I had of concern, questions, items that would need to be addressed as we go forward.

And then with that, I think now tonight we're discussing whether or not to move forward formally with submitting this, assumedly for the Springtown meeting, I would guess, but obviously that's whatever the board wants to proceed.

Um, would you like me to go through the proposed bylaw?

No, I have a question for you.

Okay, I don't have a copy of that.

Yeah, I don't either.

Oh, you don't have a copy?

I don't think any of us have it.

I had it in my package.

A copy of the bylaw?

There should be.

I submitted a memo, is dated January 21st, with the proposed bylaw attached to it with big draft.

I got minutes, I got minutes, I got lots of minutes.

Yeah, no, I don't.

So none of us got it right?

No.

Okay, nobody got it.

That's all right, John, we can fix it.

Um, the attorney, sir.

Mr. Davis is here from— I forgot your name already.

No, come up here with a chair.

No.

And I, I can— we'll wait till— yeah, that's fine.

But we can talk to this gentleman until he gets back.

Your name again, sir?

Hello again, William Davis from the Law Office of Brainsky Levinson, 1543 Faragrab.

Okay, and you are here to speak in favor of the proposed bylaw and overlay district for the proposed billboard sites.

You've reviewed the bylaw, obviously, because you said you had some with you.

Uh, yes, so I, uh, my office actually drafted the bylaw.

Well, there you go.

And the reason that your office is here is because you basically have clients that want to advertise and benefit from billboards that may be put up.

Correct.

And that client is here with me tonight.

His name is Stephen Ross, and he's with the company American Outside Advertising.

And I'm pretty sure Mr. Davis, or at least somebody from Mr. Davis's office, was here the last time we were here to discuss this, if I'm not mistaken.

Or either way, out of that discussion, we get the draft bylaw.

Yeah, right.

We, uh, we've also had a discussion with Mr. Kadeem as well prior to this meeting.

Yeah, that's fine.

But people like to know why you're here talking to us.

I understand.

And because you have— thank you— you have, you have, um, clients that want to have— you have the billboard company as a client, not necessarily places that want to advertise on the billboard?

Correct.

We, we represent, um, the advertiser.

American Outside Advertising is the name of company.

But they, they are in charge of the billboards?

Correct.

And then if somebody wants to advertise on those billboards, they have to go to them?

Correct.

And they lease the space on which those billboards are built.

So are they like competing with Lamar?

With who?

Lamar.

Lamar.

That's their competitor.

Okay.

So if I just— probably be most valuable just to go through generally the bylaw and my memo, which— but one outlines the bylaw and then 2 just has some additional comments that I had with regard to it.

In general, the bylaw calls for review of the plans in accordance with Section 2.8, which is site plan review.

It calls for the planning board to be the special permit granting authority for the applications.

It provides some additional criteria with regard to the proposed billboards.

Most notably, though, it does not specifically reference the special permit requirements or public hearing requirements, which is one of the comments that I had.

As far as the proposal, it provides for and calls for an overlay district, minimum lot area at 2,500 square feet with frontage of 150 feet.

Billboard size is proposed to be 50-foot tall, 2-sided with 400-square-foot facing sides for each billboard.

That's kind of the— and then otherwise generally consistent with 700 CMR 3, which is Massachusetts Code of Regulations that speaks to highway signage.

With regards to the specific comments that I had, which appear on the 2nd page of the memorandum, my first comment was that the— as a— the zoning board should be the special permit granting authority.

The planning board generally isn't involved with the whether or not a use is permitted.

We're generally involved in how that use gets constructed and developed on a site.

Generally, the zoning board is— it's our town body that handles the yes or no whether or not those decisions should be going forward.

That's generally consistent with our zoning bylaw, and I, in my opinion, should, should stay consistent.

Uh, if the planning board does retain the special permit granting authority, I just recommended that references be made to Section 2.2, which of the zoning bylaw, and Section 2.4, which specifically speak to the special permit, special permits, as well as the public hearing requirements.

And that would just be consistent with our other special permit procedures that the Zoning Board of Appeals currently provides for.

The designation of the bounds of the overlay district would need to be discussed.

That's something obviously we'll probably discuss tonight.

I have taken an initial look at the 195 corridor.

On the eastern side, there are a couple of areas where there are some residentials that approximate to 195 specifically in the Wheaton Avenue area.

And as you move towards the kind of central area, you also have some additional residential there.

As you go to the western side, there's more residential on the northern side, less residential on the southern side.

So I think it would be a question of whether or not we designate the overlay district over, say, highway business and industrial properties, or whether we put Sawtooth type of overlay district or straight up, as we've done in some places with our mixed-use overlay district, 250-foot from whatever road right-of-way that we're speaking to.

The other comments that I had were with regard to just noting the size of the proposed signage and height impacts on residential properties and then some discussion with regard to the setbacks.

Currently, the provisions The proposed bylaw provides for a 10-foot setback from any public right-of-way, 100-foot setback from residentially zoned properties, and offsets between 500 for non-electric and 1,000 feet for electric signage.

My only concern with that would be, how does that interplay with the fall zone of these signs should one happen to fall?

To me, and again, I'm not a sign expert or a civil engineer, but certainly that's something I think we would want to consider if one of these things were to fall.

We want to know where it's falling and that it's not going to fall into an occupied residential structure.

And then finally, comment number 7 was with regard to the fee schedule.

Obviously, if the— if this was adopted, and as we move forward and get closer to town meeting, we'll have to think about a fee schedule to be added to our— to our fee schedule for the proposed highway signs.

Um, that was my analysis.

Uh, as usual, just— I tried to stay kind of generally kind of in the middle and and just provide analysis and not commentary.

But certainly if the Board has any comments, I can answer those, and I'm sure Mr. Davis has some additional comments to make as well.

Yes, go ahead.

If I may, could I just add some context to that, more so on the location side of where these— where we would recommend this overlay district being?

One of the locations that we would strongly recommend is the area near Seekonk Speedway, which I've printed out photographs of, because that particular area does not have any sort of impact on residential homes within 2,000 feet.

So we think that that would probably be an ideal area to designate the particular District.

We also think just generally that adding this, uh, this bylaw or a district therefore would benefit local businesses, allow them to advertise, as well as the possible use of the town itself to advertise things like town meetings, issues regarding weather, Amber Alerts, and just things of that nature.

Um, and at a later date, we could also possibly discuss some sort of community host agreement as far as allowing advertising for the town of Seekonk itself, which we think would also be very beneficial in the, in the long run as well.

And the bylaw does speak to public use of the proposed signage, correct?

Obviously, that would be limited to the electronic signage, right?

And that was the biggest thing.

Electronic signage is bigger, is brighter than a regular billboard most of the time.

And We would like to have it as, as far away from residential as possible, but I understand there'll be limits.

But we need to consider the people who are living in that area so that we— and we discussed about angling the angles of the signs so when that comes on, it doesn't— hopefully doesn't bleed into residential areas because these signs are What is it, 50 feet tall?

Yep, 400 square foot.

And, and the thing is that I'm thinking of too is summertime is different than wintertime because if there's foliage there in the wintertime, it's going to be thinner, so the light's going to be brighter than in the summertime when it gets interfered with, uh, interfered with the, the brush and the trees and everything that would block it.

Just by the way, so this is his Draft, his draft.

You, you have something that you've come up with for the, for the zone, right?

Oh, you'd have to put something together very early on.

And then we kind of switched to this proposed current draft as our kind of baseline to start from.

And I would note that there still are some small changes that may need to be made to the draft, specifically as to height and size regulations.

But what was presented with the map before you is what we believe would be the ideal location for the district.

And I would say my comments and concern are mostly on the procedural side of things with regard to whether or not it's the zoning board that's the special permit-granting authority.

If it's going to be the planning board, then making sure that we reference the special permits and follow the required And though, you know, and obviously the setbacks.

So we're only talking 195 now.

I have obviously, um, old or dated material on this where we were discussing Route 6.

Well, I think you mean— I think we're just kind of talking the Route 6 corridor generally, and it being in the 195 Route 6 corridor, I think we're just going to use those terms.

When I came up, Madam Chair, I was talking about the old Alberts building has a billboard there from back in the day.

The Dowling property had a billboard back in the day.

The structure might even still be there, if I'm not mistaken.

And that's where I was getting to on the western side of that corridor where 195 and Route 6 kind of come together.

The northern side of 195 is really residential along Cole Street.

On the southern side, you've got the, you know, that's all pretty much highway business.

And I would also note that based on the new Massachusetts regulations, that old site that was just mentioned near the Darling Hotel properties wouldn't be suitable anymore.

It wouldn't— proximity to the on-ramp, right?

Yeah, because of the on-ramp location.

When you go to East Providence— oh, different state— they're basically on the on-ramp.

Yeah, let's, let's not mix up here.

One other thing I will say, just for context, I think most the signs that are on 195 currently are electronic signs.

And I think just in general, in the trend of what I've seen traveling around, electronic signs are more the norm now than the old school.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, I agree with that.

And with the driving that I do, and this is no insult to billboard people, but most of the time, if I look at them for a second, that'd be about it.

Because, you know, Yeah, I think we also spoke one time about the limitation of what could be advertised on here, on the billboards that are located in town.

A touchy subject generally.

So let's touch on it.

Well, generally, Mr. James can speak to this as well as Massachusetts Attorney.

Um, towns cannot regulate and governments cannot regulate the content of signage.

Um, so we can't Say if we adopt this, we can't tell people what they can and cannot put up there.

That can't be a condition of our approval.

So you can't have inappropriate content?

I'll turn it over to the Massachusetts attorney.

Yeah, that would turn into a matter of constitutional law as to free speech, and then also it would be dependent on what kind of content would be allowed by whoever's doing the advertising.

I don't know what kind of experience So does the, does the property owner who would have this on their property have a say in what goes on their billboard?

Because it might represent their property.

You might.

If you're going to say something, you're going to need to move that over, please.

Stephen Ross with American Outside Advertising.

Stephen what, sir?

Ross.

Ross.

Okay.

American Outside Advertising, 105 Sunset Rock Road, Andover, Massachusetts.

Okay, so, so I might move more to you.

There's probably some slack on the system.

Yeah, I think it's probably stuck.

Yeah.

Thank you.

There you go.

Our company will not advertise any sexually orientated businesses.

We won't do any attack ads.

We don't do anything that, you know, is very divisive, such as pro-abortion or pro-life.

We do, you know, we do Budweiser or alcohol.

Um, while the state allows marijuana, we would advertise that as well.

And really everything else, a lot of it is attorneys, car dealerships, restaurants.

It's really run-of-the-mill type of advertisers.

No, that's, that's great, but it— the point had, it had to be brought up because we need to know.

Yes.

And so do the people that are watching, because nobody wants— huh?

I was just saying, in the end, we as a town cannot regulate No, I know, but I still like to hear from the people who, who may or may not have control of it.

I mean, you can't— one sign company though, right?

But you can't, um, you know, nobody wants to go down the road looking at that.

Seaconch doesn't want to go down the road looking at offensive or whatever.

I didn't know what the regulations were.

We can't make the right regulation, but it's nice to hear from the company because we'd be very upset.

Yeah, I would, uh, also just note that something that this might be somewhat comparable to but on a lesser size in this case would be, uh, the Rehoboth billboard off Barney Avenue that does advertise it.

Exactly.

They do a lot of advertising for local companies like J&J Materials, Hillside, as well as town announcements, uh, that sort of thing, and weather alerts.

My thing was more along the triple X stuff.

You know, you have kids in cars, and if so, if we can't regulate it, can the property owner say we don't want that on our property and stuff like that?

You know, that's what I was trying to get at.

Like, they can be kind of— so yes, the property owner can— we can have in a lease where things are prohibited, uh, there, but we wouldn't put that up.

Okay.

No, I'm— yeah, yeah, just had to be said.

Yes, asked.

So were we saying in business district only?

Do I understand that?

I would— all over the board.

Process-wise, I'm imagining that the board's gonna either tell me to take this back to the planning board and work on those specifics as far as what their recommendations are, is who the special permit authority is, where we should do this.

I'd love to have some direction from the board as I do that.

Um, so, and then kind of come back and then formally submit it as, you know, a submission for— so have all of you read what the attorney wrote as far as he We drafted the, um, my comments are based on the draft, right?

Yeah.

So, so my comments with the residential is the town owns a lot of land from Mott and School out to 195 and from Anthony Street a distance down.

So if it was— if then that's all zoned residential, so if it was prohibited, then the town would lose out on some of the revenue.

What's the What's the distance from the on-ramp/off-ramp you said you mentioned?

It's 500 feet from where the dotted line hits the white line.

So 500 feet past that is a, is a minimum, except for if the town has more than 50,000 people, then the ramp rule is nonexistent.

I don't know why.

Okay, trying to think if that comes into play with the Martin School.

Martin School, look, I'm, I'm looking at a map now of that section of 19— the 195 corridor, and it looks to me that it's a about 500 feet, or certainly a portion of the property is.

Um, again, my only concern would be you've got obviously a lot of residential around that Martin School.

So when you go for state approvals, what's the distance between one electronic sign to the next?

Uh, it's 1,000 feet between— and yes, between signs either side of the road.

And I, I looked at the 195 corridor, and the location that we have picked and have a lease with the property owner at Seekonk Speedway, I think it's the only location that meets the state criteria.

So regardless of what your overlay district is, no one else would be able to get a permit.

You wouldn't have proliferation of billboards along the 195 corridor, right?

But that doesn't— that doesn't, um, include— so you can— you can have an electronic sign and then within 1,000 feet you could have one that's not electronic?

Is that— that's my understanding, right?

Yes, 500-foot spacing from, um, uh, for a non-digital sign And then same side of the road, right?

And then 1,000 feet for 2 digitals?

Yes, 1,000-foot spacing between the digitals either side of the road.

Okay.

But another requirement for the state is that you have to have, um, 2 businesses within 500 feet of the sign.

So when you look at what is, um, along the I-95 corridor, there's very, very limited.

I think we have the only location that meets the state criteria.

So I just wanted to point that out there.

There are specifications on how many— like, so if you're looking at, you know, the town-owned property and then, you know, property going down, like, you're going to be limited on how many signs you can get out there.

I'm pretty sure close to the town line on both sides we've got signs existing, but we'd have to have separation up.

That's going to shrink that down.

And those offset and setback requirements are also set forth in Section, uh, 6.2.

12.9.

And I believe those are reiterations of the state requirements.

And I believe that also at that Secon Speedway site, there may still be footings or a foundation for a previous billboard.

Okay, so we need to— we, you, Mr. Orvin, after we tell you, direction, yes, first of all, we have to come up with a billboard overlay district, correct?

Yes.

Well, I, I don't think the select board needs to come up with that district this evening.

I think the select board gives me some direction as to what do we want to focus on— the highway business and the industrial.

Do we want to try to include the Martin School property?

Um, obviously, you know, that kind of direction will help me put that together.

Take a look at where the, the existing signs are, where those buffer is going to be and kind of box it in a little bit based on the, you know, 1,000-foot.

Personally, I'm only thinking of 195.

I'm not thinking of putting any billboards inside the town next to residential or whatever areas.

You know, we have enough problems with that sign bylaw as it runs in the town anyway.

I'm thinking of 195 as only— that's what Martin School is.

That's 195 is what he's talking about.

I see what you're saying.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Well, we need to protect Martin School anyway.

I can drop in that area a couple of iterations, see what it looks like under a couple of those scenarios, right?

Bring it back to the planning board if that's what the— or I can bring it back to the select board first, whatever you guys want to do.

If you came up with a plan that showed, say, the maximum footprint, and then we can back it out from there.

Oh, what?

Yeah, based on state law.

Yeah, I can do it with the highway business in the industrial.

I can do it with just a straight 300 feet off of 195, and I can do it a little more kind of sawtooth, right?

All right, that's good.

We'll have those 3 options.

You have, uh, your number one thing is the zoning board should be the special permit granting authority.

Sounds good to me.

Just only for the fact that the planning board doesn't usually do— if they do, how in the zoning board generally, as Mr. DeGarde said.

That's— yeah, my preference would be to come back to the select board first.

Yeah.

And then submit it for a formal review.

Yes, because we want all, all these things.

We want to know what the district is and that.

And thank you for being here because you answered some of my questions.

Nothing against you, sir.

Has our lawyers reviewed this?

Uh, no, I don't think so.

There's nothing really.

Do they have to?

They have a lawyer.

We got lawyers.

Do we have to review this at some point once, once it's drafted?

All right, if the board's all right with the comments that I made, I'll make those changes into the bylaw.

We can send it to town council for their comments.

I'll loop in Mr. Davis and we'll go come back in a month or so.

Yeah, and with the goal to try to get on to spring town meeting.

Oh, that's fine, that's fine.

That's, that's— yeah, keeping the goal.

No, that's good.

And John, when you come back, could we have, um, all that documentation presentation before the meeting so we have a chance?

Yeah, yeah, we do have some scheduling issues.

That's okay.

Thank you, bud.

Identified where they— yeah, you'll do, you'll do a drawing too.

I'm gonna— yeah, actually I've already got the, the maps kind of roughed out.

Yeah, I'm just going to take tonight's discussion and lay them out on here.

Yeah, just make sure we have everything for next time, John.

So, uh, next time, so we can understand it, John.

So we can understand it, John.

Okay, you get that?

Well, I don't know.

I can't speak to the understanding.

Come on.

Have a good night, everyone.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Okay, so they're gonna come back, so that's good.

Second quarter budget presentation.

That's all right, don't worry about that.

Thank you.

We'll figure it out.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So just the second quarter budget update.

So to date for the second quarter, the budget still remains balanced with no major issues identified.

Our salaries are trending below budget forecasts.

We'll get into that a little bit more.

Our expenditures are trending below target overall for the second quarter as well.

Our revenues are trending slightly below budget projections, but no real concerns there.

As the board knows, we just did the tax recap in November.

So the tax classification was held on November 12th.

The recap was submitted and approved by the DOR on November 18th.

So it was a quick turnaround time.

Our actual real estate bills were mailed by the December deadline, which represent the 3rd and 4th quarter bills.

For the assessor's office, our new growth was certified at $642,174.

We had anticipated $500,000 for new growth leading up to the preparation of the budget, so $142,000 higher than we budgeted, which was good.

In that breakdown, residential property valuations— residential equated to 50.8% of that new growth value.

Personal property was 38.8%, and then commercial represented 15.4% of that new growth certification from the DOR.

The FY25 average real estate value increased by 7%.

So the single-family average real estate value is $558,474.

Again, that's up 7% from fiscal year '25.

The average single-family tax bill based on this is $6,852.

That's an increase of $406.

So the single-family parcels, we have 5,107, and the SECONC income per capita is $48,536.

So comparing that to the state average for a single-family tax bill, this State average is $8,114.

That increased by $384 at the state level.

Uh, the state average single-family assessed value increased, uh, by 5.7%, uh, compared to the 7% for SECONC values, uh, and the new assessed value is $743,136.

That $48,000 figure, do you know how much that increased over last year?

I'm sorry, which figure?

The income per capita.

Oh, I do not know.

I can get that for you though.

Okay.

Yeah, then moving on to the Treasurer's Office.

Uh, so as the board is aware, the revenue components, uh, 9.4% is equated to other revenue, uh, just under 70% is property tax, 12.4% comes from state aid, and then 8.6% is coming from local receipts.

Uh, the Treasurer's Office, uh, for insurance, uh, worked with our, um, our insurance company, um, MEGA Omega— not our trash haulers, different company— uh, to do the FY24 workers' compensation audit, which was completed with no, no issues.

Uh, we also submitted by, by the deadline, uh, the required deadline of December 15th, our health insurance responsibility disclosures.

Uh, the Collector's Office issued, uh, 1,008, uh, disposal demands.

So that's about 18% of the total, uh, tax, uh, disposal bills that went out for FY26.

And then they also liened 272 for FY25 unpaid disposal, uh, bills that were placed on the FY26 real estate bill.

Before you skip over, it says the workman's comp audit completed with no outstanding issues.

Yep.

So basically, I mean, there was some issues, but they were minimal and were corrected?

Uh, no, no, no, there were no outstanding issues.

So that means there were no issues?

There were no issues.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right, sounds better.

Okay.

Because, because if there's no outstanding, there may be some that— okay, thanks.

And then the FY26 tax bills, as I mentioned, went out.

Uh, those represent 3rd and 4th quarter for the actual bills.

Then moving on to the tax title.

So we had 39 parcels in tax title.

We had a reduction in our installer installment agreements that went down by 1, and then we added 2 additional foreclosure cases going through Land Court.

The revenue summary.

So as I mentioned earlier, we're slightly below in some of the areas.

The major category is going to be our real estate.

So we're at 47.2%.

So as a rule of thumb, we collect about 98%, and then everything else goes obviously to tax title.

But when we're doing our budgeting forecast for revenue, we budget 100% because at some point we are going to collect 100%.

Percent, whether it's through tax title or through the collection.

But again, slightly below target at the 47.2%.

Again, we're typically about 2% that we still have to collect through tax title.

Personal property has— is slightly ahead of our schedule at 50.5%.

The commitment there is $3.7 million.

We've collected $1.86 million.

I'll go back to the real estate because I didn't mention that piece.

The commitment on the real estate is $52.4 million, and through the second quarter we received $24.7 million.

Motor vehicle excise— our commitment is below target.

We have just over $3 million in commitment for that.

Year-to-date receipts is $364,000.

Our larger commitment is in February, so that's when we'll get the, the big commitments, and then the several other smaller commitments, but by the third quarter, we'll really get a feel for whether or not we're going to meet our target.

Local receipts, the commitment is $1.8 million.

Year-to-date receipts collected is $466,000, so 58.4%.

That's ahead of target.

That doesn't make— that doesn't add up, does it?

What's that?

If the target's $1.8 million and you're at $466,000, you're not even halfway there.

Oh, maybe I had it— Maybe I had a typo.

Maybe it should have been 9.

Where's the 4?

1, 2, 3, 4.

Yeah, it might have been like an 8 or a 9 or a 7.

I'll double-check that.

But the percentage— and I can get it quickly.

I'm sorry.

It's supposed to be ahead of— so the percentage is correct?

The percentage is correct, yes.

Yeah, I might have just transposed it.

So it's 58.4% of $1,865,100 that we need to— yeah, it's close to 9.

Yeah.

And then on the meals tax, uh, we had a commitment of $690,000.

Year-to-date receipts, $369,000 collected.

That's ahead of target, 53.6%.

Hotel tax, uh, $800,000.

Uh, year-to-date receipts through the second quarter coming in at $490,000.

And then our marijuana tax is slightly below target, uh, so we're at $810, for the commitment for the year, coming in at 47.7%.

But as you said, the next revenue summary that we get will, will be closer to target, right?

Correct.

And then the real— it's a lot of below, that's why I'm— and then we'll get, we'll get some fluctuation.

We'll probably get a little bit more collection in the real estate tax, especially if there are going to be abatements.

You have to pay your real estate bills in order to apply for abatement which is due by February 1st.

So we'll see that number increase.

Yep.

Okay.

The marijuana tax, we're taking a beating, huh?

A little bit.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So here is just the total salaries and expenses.

A couple of areas just to highlight.

So public safety coming in at 54.2%.

So what's really driving that is just the police department for expenses.

So we paid up lease payments in the beginning of the fiscal year, and then we also paid the Flock camera software system up front.

So that was about $60,000.

If you recall, we actually had the, the Flock camera software was paid for OPER the prior year.

So this is the first year that it was actually in the budget.

So that is driving that expense up a little bit more.

I'll also point out that Flock cameras have gotten a lot of headlines over the last month or so with the Brown shooting and, you know, the use of the flock cameras.

So we've got a number of flock cameras in town, and we have access to that system as well.

So it was very beneficial and continues to be beneficial for the police department.

Education— it's exactly where we anticipated it to be, 60.6%.

But when you're looking at the, you know, quarter 2, you sometimes just go down looking at 50%.

But we paid Bristol County 100% of our assessment, and we're just over 50% for tri-county on the assessment there.

Debt and interest, same thing, 51.1%.

We just made the payments accordingly, so we don't anticipate being over budget on that.

And then other fixed costs coming in at 66.8%, again, based on our forecasting, is on target.

Pension was paid in full at the beginning of the year so we don't get hit with an interest payment if we do 2 different payments over the fiscal year.

And then we also fully funded our liability insurance.

So that's what's driving that.

And then moving over to the quarterly performance for budgeted salaries.

So for the 2nd quarter, we would— we should be at $8.1 million.

We're actually at $7.5 million.

So as I mentioned before, below budgeted salaries, again due to vacancies.

So DPW currently has 3 vacancies that need to be filled.

The fire department currently has 3 that we're looking to fill.

We also have one individual who's out on IOD that we're going through the process for disability retirement, so that could potentially add another vacancy.

Police department is— all their vacancies are filled.

However, we have 4 individuals who are not being paid because they're going through the academy, and we're doing background on that.

So that's contributing to the surplus in the salary account.

For budgeted expense, $15.2 million for— forecasted for the second quarter.

Actual coming in at $14.4 million.

So again, below what our overall projections are.

So for salaries, 46% expended with a surplus of $647,000.

Thousand anticipated for quarter 2.

And then expenses, 59.6% expended, uh, with an expense surplus of $797,000, uh, for quarter 2.

Open it up to questions.

Fantastic.

Oh, thank you.

No, thank you.

Anyone have any other questions than what's already gone through?

Everybody good?

Okay, and you are good too, right?

I am.

Yep.

Okay, discussion to consider putting the South End Fire Station on the upcoming town election ballot.

Now, I for one asked for a legal opinion on doing this, um, so I will give it to you.

Town meeting by a 2/3 vote appropriates the funds for a particular purpose.

Purpose and authorizes the borrowing.

Only the select board, by a 2/3 vote, can put a debt exclusion question on the ballot.

There is no mechanism for either town meeting or voters via petition to place a debit— a debt exclusion question on the ballot.

The sequence in which the town meeting and election occurs does not matter.

Either one can take place before the other, and the question of how to present to the voters is a matter of strategy, i.e., where is there likely to be more opposition and how should that be addressed through the sequencing of the town meeting or election votes.

But the select board must vote to approve, and the town clerk must receive written notice of the full text of the question to be placed on the ballot at least 35 days before the date of the regular or special town election at which the question will appear.

There is no limit on the number of times that the town can present a debt exclusion question to the voters, so long as the steps required all occur at least 35 days prior to the election.

However, if the town meeting vote is contingent upon approval of the ballot question, the ballot question must be approved no later than 90 days following an appropriation made at a special town meeting, or no later than September 15th following an appropriation made at an annual town meeting, in order for the appropriation to be valid.

Now, I asked for this because I thought that this would be the 3rd time that a question on the South End Fire Station would be put before the town— twice at town meeting, and then this would be the 3rd one.

And I know in some instances that, that, well, I just found out for zoning purposes, um, it's if you put something before town meeting and it's voted down, then you can't put it before town, the town again for 2 years.

So I wanted to make sure that if, if this goes on as a, uh, a ballot question, that we weren't violating any time restraints or restrictions.

So That's why I had asked for this.

So now we know this.

So if, if the board votes to put it on a ballot, that it is legal to do it that way.

I just want to make sure that everybody knows that up front.

Okay, so clarify one statement you made.

If you denied zoning change, there is a 2-year window unless you go back to the planning board and convince them that there's significant changes and you can go prior to the 2 years.

Okay, but right now we're not talking about zoning, right?

You would know about that.

Yes.

And seeing as you asked to have this put on, go, your turn.

Okay.

The whole process of the Sultan Fire Station began with this board 6 years ago doing a feasibility study and asking the townspeople to appropriate $425,000 for design.

That now, with the interest and everything, the taxpayers have invested about half a million dollars into those plans that are like many others in the basement, just gaining dust.

But with the Permit Extension Act, which allows those plans to still be valid we can use the plans that have— basically, it's a shovel-ready project.

The need is more than there.

That was confirmed in the feasibility study commissioned by this board.

And I think the townspeople have the right to act and vote fully if they want the South End fire— I get calls all the time for people asking if what's going to happen with the Sultan Fire Station.

And I said, well, hopefully we'll, we'll move it forward.

So it costs us nothing to put it on the ballot, and it's a question that needs to be answered.

And you don't consider going to town meeting twice and having it voted down as answering your question?

The question?

Well, in answer to that We went the first time and we got a majority vote, 51 to 49, but it wasn't two-thirds.

We went the second time and we got 65-35, but we lost it by 7 votes.

All right, and I still say it was outside interference to that, but that's okay.

But this board that was so hot on a $40 million DPW, you got denied at town meeting at 58%, and you still went forward 2 weeks later, and then the town's people by a vote of 82 to 18 said no.

So if it's fair for the DPW that failed at town meeting to go forward and let the townspeople vote on— I say the fire station, which is not a want, it's a need— that we owe it to the taxpayers to let them decide once and for all.

And then certainly if it, if it wins, then it would have to be brought back to a subsequent town meeting for funding.

So in the ballot question, you're not going to put any dollar amount?

We were told that you can't.

You can't.

Okay, so is the question— the ballot question already written up somewhere?

Sometimes this is done ahead of time, so that's what— that's why I'm asking.

It would be basically the same ballot question that you had for the library.

Just change library to fire station.

Am I correct on that?

Yeah, either DBW library.

Yeah, they're pretty much similar.

So basically, what would the question be?

Not that it would be— I— you don't have to give me— no, no.

So, so whether or not you would support— and I, I forget exactly, uh, it's probably a Proposition 2.5 override for the particular project.

The address would be there.

No dollar amount can be put on it.

The it's just a state requirement.

The state sees any type of dollar amount as almost advocating for a project and not advocating for a project.

It's supposed to be neutral.

So there's, there's no dollar amount.

That's essentially what it would say.

Okay, so basically, it would be a vote of interest in whether to move forward with a South End fire station.

But then after that, if it passes at the ballot, it has to come back to town meeting floor.

Yes, because so there's 2— everybody kind of takes both votes as, as being the same vote.

They're 2 separate, completely separate votes.

So, so town meeting is voting on an appropriation and the authorization for bonding, and then the ballot question is saying that we're gonna do— if you, if you want to do a debt exclusion, an override, you have to get the override by the voters.

So 2 separate, completely requests.

So what, what he would be requesting is, is the fact that this project would be supported by a debt exclusion.

If that passes, then you can go to town meeting saying we've got support for a debt exclusion.

You would be asking town meeting to support the project now at that point, which the dollar amount would be associated with that because you need the appropriation and the authorization by 2/3 because it's borrowing for the ability to go out and bond.

And then if that passes, then it's Done.

Then it's up to the board.

I mean, at that point, it's the board's decision whether or not the project moves forward.

But we've got all the— we've got all the approvals that we need.

We've got the authorization, we've got the appropriation, and then we got the approval for debt exclusion.

Anybody else anything?

So I will tell you right out, I approve— I support a South End fire station.

I do not support the building or the cost that was given at our last town meeting.

Um, I know the design, it was designed for a little bit more than what's going to go in it because the original design was for not only the fire station but to have the communications department in it, and they— that was removed.

Um, and I, I think it was like $9 million or what was it?

It was millions of dollars because of the complexity of the communications department.

But the design hasn't changed.

It's still the same.

And we were told at the time, at the last town meeting, $10 million— $9 million.

And that's where my sticking point is because I've been involved in building projects and I don't believe you can build the building that you have designed for $9 million.

But that's me.

So go ahead.

Yes, so that figure of $9.45 million— I met with the chairman of the building committee, Mr. Tosino, who was actively in construction and runs a fairly sized, large-sized construction company, and he said a lot of costs have come down, and he still feels strongly that it can be done for that amount.

But in fairness, because this has been going on for so long, if it passes at the ballot, I think the prudent thing to do is before it goes to town meeting is to rebid it just so that we know exactly what we're asking for, because that would make the most— well, yeah, that, that would be a given, I would think.

Yep.

Actually, um, I forgot something.

Anybody else got anything?

I thought of something else and now I forgot it.

The only thing I have is, um, if this goes to a town-wide vote and it passes and we go back to town meeting and it, it finds a way to pass without changing our current plan that we have— what plan do we have?

We haven't talked about staffing, we haven't talked about anything.

Those are the issues why it failed the last time, in my opinion.

Um, nothing's changed.

We haven't discussed it.

We don't even know what the budget outlook for next year is going to be.

You just heard during the presentation from Mr. Gadeem, we're down 3 firefighters.

We have another one that's possibly a disability.

So there's 4.

That's almost half of a group, just to get us back to square one.

We haven't even addressed the issue of the current staffing levels at the 2 stations that we have.

We haven't even looked at, are we going to be able to even afford— I don't know what the— I mean, where the budget's going to be.

If we're going to be able to afford any firefighters for next year.

So there's a lot of questions that we have to ask.

So we're going to go to— we're going to go to a town-wide vote, get the consensus of the town, go to a town meeting again with what plan?

What has changed since September?

What's changed since June?

That's where my concern is.

I said this before and I'll say it again and again, we need to have a better plan than just winging it because this is what we want, right?

And we haven't discussed it, dude.

There's no set plan in place.

And I would hate to see you go through a town-wide vote, go to another town meeting, have the same discussions that we have, and we sit there with no fucking— no freaking answers.

Well, the— my answer to that— no, my answer to that is if the town votes for it and they want to, we have to budget for more firefighters because we're not going to— we are not going to be putting firefighters' lives in danger just to get a fire station down the South End.

But this isn't going to happen tomorrow either because things take forever around here.

So we're talking years in advance.

I received— we have us— did you redo the staffing mod— yeah, model?

Because I've got old staffing models here that we've gotten along the way about how many people that he's gonna, uh, that the fire department's gonna have or have have.

So we did have— we actually had a meeting today, myself, the chief, the deputy chief, the finance director, and then the assistant TA/HR director to discuss staffing levels.

So the chief has a number of staffing levels.

We're actually just going to be tweaking— I don't know, Chief, if you want to come down, but we're going to be tweaking some of the information that he presented to us.

But we're looking at a comprehensive presentation to the board.

So one, just talking about the 2 stations that we currently have, the staffing levels that we need to get to based on what the chief is recommending.

We currently have 4 new hires that has been put into the current budget.

Again, they're just an initial department budget that was put in.

We won't know what the budget looks like for FY27.

The governor's numbers should be coming out this Friday.

So we'll probably have a better understanding, at least initially, what we're looking at for local aid.

So that's really going to kind of drive a lot of our conversation moving forward in terms of what we can and cannot afford.

But part of our conversation that we had today was, one, not looking at the fire department in a silo, right?

So we need to look at the total cost and the operating costs for the entire, the entire town.

So we're going to be looking at, you know, a 5-year to 10-year forecast that will identify exactly based on the model that he is projecting that will be presented to the board, and if supported by the board, how we get there over a 3-year period to cover the 2 stations.

And then concurrently, we'll have a second forecast, 5 to 10 year, with that model in place, and then also what it looks like with the impacts of a South End fire station.

So again, if we're going debt exclusion, a majority of that cost is going to be on burden of additional taxes, so that's not necessarily coming out of the operating budget.

But what will come out of the operating budget is the cost to obviously maintain the building, the equipment associated with it, and the additional staffing.

So that's what we're currently looking at, and we'll have that projected as well based on the staffing models that the chief will be making a presentation, a recommendation to the board.

So I don't want to put words in the chief's mouth in terms of when we think we can get that done, but I would say that either the next meeting or the meeting after that, we should probably be able to have a presentation to the board.

If I could, to Michael's point, I absolutely agree we've got to come up with a plan.

And if we pass this in April, I'm not saying let's go to the May town meeting.

The soonest I would think would maybe be November town meeting, the fall town meeting.

Let's have a plan.

We were going to have a discussion last last fall, and that fell apart, which is unfortunate.

But I agree, we need a plan, whatever it is.

We need a plan.

But the plan should have never been to even ask the taxpayers to spend— waste half a million dollars if you were going to go forward with building the building.

And you know, the— when we left, walked out of the town meeting, I'll have to say this, the police chief came up to me and shook my hand, and he said, well, I guess they there goes my training room, because we had suggested like an outpost or an area down there.

So I— there's a, there's a dual purpose for that building, and we're never going to build it any cheaper than we can now.

And I think the time is now to move forward.

6 years ago when this was all proposed, I thought we'd be in a lot different spot than what we were.

We were talking about hiring 4 firefighters a year to bring up I believe it was 12 to 16 to bring up our current staffing, and then we could— by the time this was built, we'd have enough to occupy the down south.

There was too many competing issues at the time.

Teachers were talking about getting laid off.

There was other departments that had needs, so it didn't go through.

And so we couldn't bring on the firefighters.

I was hoping this year we could bring on 8, possibly, just to get our current 2 stations up to staffing.

As far as the DPW, we all know that building's not good.

That's why we moved forward with it, because that was the— that is a move-in ready.

If you build DPW tomorrow, we have the staffing, everyone to put into it, and that can be operational.

That's the biggest need.

That thing's condemned.

It's a piece of shit.

Everyone knows that.

That was the main priority at the time.

So as far as this, the firefighters, I mean, you want to build a building, we aren't where we were, where we thought we were going to be from 6 years ago.

We just don't have the staff.

So you're going to be running everyone thinner and thinner unless you want to build it, and then we're going to automatically hire 16 firefighters tomorrow.

That's my thought.

But people just open up their tax bills, and if you see online, they weren't too happy about it.

And you know, and I don't want to strike a nerve, and with all due respect to you, your department in Fall River for years screamed about manpower.

10 people died, and then all of a sudden they found the money.

Typically what happens, you know, I've lived in this town a long time and you guys could probably remember it.

Anthony Street and Route 6 was the worst intersection in southern New England, and it took a few people to die, then the state came and fixed it.

So we've got to address this.

We've got to be proactive rather than reactive.

And I mean, yes, 6 years down the road, where are you going to be in 6 years?

Who knows?

But we got to address it.

It's, it's a need.

I mean, public safety.

It should be number one.

I get it, but when you have teachers that were getting laid off saying it's a need, we need to teach the kids, our staffing window went out and our money went from us to the schools.

So we didn't have the staffing of where we thought we were going to be.

So I say it costs— all it costs is your vote.

Let the taxpayers decide.

I, I don't understand why this board has a problem with letting the people that elected them make the decision.

That makes no sense to me because they say we, we're just going to be putting the thing on the ballot until we get the answer we want.

We're not satisfied with the no vote, just keep ramming it down the resident's throat.

But we've already done town meeting.

We haven't done it twice.

Twice.

Twice.

Without the second time, they already— without the support of this board.

And if Tom Benoit— if Tom Benoit was here, we tell you it took him 3 times to go to the ballot to get the North School project Done.

Oh, that was way before my time.

But we don't have the staffing to put in it.

We could build the building, it's 2 years down the road.

It's 2 years.

You're gonna be prepared in 2 years to put— you're absolutely right— I don't even know, 8, 12, 16 just to run that station, plus get Station 1 and 2 on board and fully staffed.

We thought we had a plan 6 years ago.

I did.

We just, we just didn't get there.

Like I said, we had teachers literally in front of us crying about they were going to get laid off And they were blaming the Board of Selectmen.

We had no say in that.

So money went from one thing to the other.

To my view, reality of it, if you vote no, you're denying the taxpayers their due process.

I'll vote present.

Good.

Well, you can do that if you'd like.

Miss Cozy, you guys have all said very good things, and I agree with each and every one of you.

I, I, you know, we sit here every year with a budget and things have to get cut.

And like you said, for 6 years you've been saying you're going to put firefighters on.

I've been here for 3 and we've been doing the same thing.

And every year when the budget comes before us, they're like one of the first things cut.

So, you know, and DPW is part of safety too.

I mean, public safety, you know, they're not riding around in rescues and police cars, but they're out there shovel, you know, plowing the streets and maintaining the buildings and So, you know, they're a priority as well.

So I really don't have anything different to say than what you guys have already said.

I can't see building a building that's going to be understaffed and then— or have to understaff every other— or the existing buildings to try and put people, you know, in a new one.

So, well, my thought would be that if it went to ballot and it got voted in, then that the town's the town wants to have the other fire station, that it has to be a priority, priority for us over the next 2 or 3 years to build up the staffing at the fire department.

And yes, and then we haven't even talked about the equipment, right?

Because I'm sure there's a minimal, you know, fire engine, 2 fire engines, a rescue.

That's another probably $2 million on top of what it's going to cost to build it.

But I mean, that would be something that we would have to prioritize and, and not cut.

They wouldn't— they can't— if the town wants that station, then it— they can't cut it.

Somebody else will be cut.

I mean, I'd like to wait on this, this particular vote about putting this on the ballot till we hear what's going on with the plan that Sean was talking about earlier.

You know, that you— they're working on a plan.

Let's see what it is.

And the governor's numbers.

And the governor's numbers.

I just think this— this— to make a vote tonight on this item is too early without knowing what the plan is or what the budget is.

And I've supported bringing it to the residents for— let them decide.

But I've always said since day one, the residents got to decide.

They're not just buying a building, they got to put manpower and apparatus.

So it's a whole package deal.

Unfortunately, when we bought it, I said let's make separate warrant articles.

For the fire engine ambulance.

So if the building gets passes, they realize they got to spend money on this.

And I was told, let's not waste our time, let's see if the building— I had an idea on the apparatus, and we were supposed to meet in October and have that discussion, and it never happened.

Oh, but we still need people to drive it too, drive the apparatus.

So it's a whole package deal.

Really?

I didn't realize that.

I thought they were robots.

Well, maybe when we're all passed, that might be the future.

Because it, it just doesn't seem like it's just a, a question of whether the town people want it.

I want it, but it, it has to, has to come the right way.

I mean, if this gets voted in and the town votes for it, it's going to be built in there.

They're going to pay for it.

We are going to pay for it because we are in this town too.

Chief, you're standing there looking at me.

Come down if you want to say something.

Chief, I think the only thing we need is— because I just don't want to overcommit— so next meeting, or do you need 2 meetings?

So, so that would be the beginning of February, the end of February.

We just need to finalize some of the slide deck that we had talked about.

Yeah, this morning would be aggressive for next meeting, but I can shoot for that.

But I can give you an update, you know, by mid-agenda time next week.

Well, it's February 4th or the 18th.

We could go out to the 18th, which is about a month.

I think we got the schools coming in.

Yes, the first meeting.

So are we okay with the second meeting in February?

Just because I don't, I don't want to rush it.

I just want to make sure.

And then overall, you know, we talked about the, uh, the 5 to 10 year, uh, perspective, uh, so I have yet to even look at that.

But okay, so I'll put my mind on that.

Um, we'll make sure it's guaranteed for the end of the— the other question I have is the 35-day.

So our election is April 6th.

So March 6th, that would be the end of February, right?

So that would have to be it.

No, you, you would set whatever, whatever date you want.

No, no, no, no, no.

If it goes on the ballot.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

If it goes on the ballot.

Yeah.

So that would be the last discussion that would come up.

We have to decide that.

Take the vote.

Yeah, right.

They'd have to decide because we got to give the town clerk, uh, like 35 days.

35 calendar days.

I think it's, I think it's, um, calendar days, not business.

It doesn't say one way or the other, just 35 days.

Yeah, I'll confirm that.

It's the state.

I, I do think it's, it's actual days.

Calendar days.

Yeah.

It usually is unless they specify business.

We should make it— we'll make it.

Yeah, that would just make it.

But that would be so everybody knows that that would be the last February 18th.

So yeah, and just so everybody— so we can, you know, the walk away is that on average what we're using for a number all in with, you know, health insurance, things of that nature.

You know, employee benefits is about $100,000 per firefighter.

So I think that's on some of this paperwork too.

I have to throw away all the old stuff and start again with new stuff because I got a ton of stuff here for— and do me a favor, we're talking about SEACONC, don't compare us to anybody else Please.

We want it because I have things in here that refer to other towns.

Let's just talk about Seaconch and the manning and the equipment and the benefits.

Okay.

Absolutely.

And that was part of the overall presentation.

You know, I kind of want to get through the weeds, really.

Yeah, that's a very refined presentation.

Yeah.

And that takes time.

So yeah.

Nope, that's fine.

That's so— well, Take a motion to postpone, um, any vote on the South End Fire Station to be put on a town— the town election ballot until February 18th.

So moved.

February 18th.

Um, any other questions?

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

You said aye, Chris?

Yes.

Okay.

Your name on the side.

Yeah, no, that's fine.

Thank you.

Okay, no, thank you, Chief.

Thank you very much.

Um, all my notes.

Okay, consider accepting the open session meeting— no, open session minutes of January 7th, 2026.

So moved.

Second.

Okay, got a motion and a second.

Does anybody have any questions, changes, additions?

Anything?

Anything?

Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Seeing none, unanimous.

Thank you.

We come to Community Speaks again.

Anybody out there?

Oh, Mr. Alves, have a seat, my friend.

I'm glad, Mr. Community.

What can we do for you, Mr. Alves?

Thank you, Madam Chairman.

John Alves, uh, 25 River Street.

Uh, and thank the board for the previous discussion, uh, on the South End Fire Station.

Um, as, as I understand it, there is a potential motion to go forward with a, with a ballot question first and then, uh, town meeting.

Excuse the language, in my opinion, that's ass-backwards.

Um, at town meeting, there's ample opportunity, much opportunity for discussion.

You put it on the ballot first, it's limited discussion.

If somebody's watching this meeting, fine and dandy, but I don't think that's, that's as as much discussion you'll see at town meeting.

So I would much rather see— go to town meeting first, and then if we're going to do that, go to town meeting first and then a ballot question.

Okay, I understand that, but you know that what— that is legal.

That's why I asked for the legal decision that I read.

Completely understood.

Okay, it's just Wile E. Coyote, Sneaky Pete, is, is walking in this door by doing it the way that's being suggested.

Yeah, but then the ballot is just going to ask— it will tell us whether everybody that votes, if they're interested.

And then by going to the town, then they're going to need to have specifics and numbers and dollar amounts.

That's not going to be on the ballot.

Understood.

And neither is there going to be much discussion on the ballot except here's the question, as opposed to town meeting Here's the question, and, and a lot of discussion.

What, what my issue is, lack of discussion versus, uh, at ballot versus a town meeting.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Alves.

Anyone else from the community?

Come on down, sir.

Bob Archambault, 17 Tiringham Road.

Uh, a couple points, a little bit of an echo for Mr. Alves there.

I, I agree that needs to be discussion, should be open to hear what people have to say about the South End Fire Station.

We're adding Whole Foods, Market Basket, a lot of volume, a lot of traffic in the south end of the, of the town.

I think it needs to be open.

I mean, my, my whole feeling, my whole gut feeling is this whole town politics needs to be more opened up to get more dialogue and transparency.

To Mr. Zorra's point, yeah, we're talking about a building.

We're also talking about staffing, um, vehicles.

Infrastructure to go along with that.

It needs to be open.

People need to know the whole process.

We talked about the Medeiros Farm as an aside.

It needs to be opened up so people know the whole story— what's it going to cost, projections, maintenance going forward— not just a piece of it, like a piece of it with a building.

The town residents and taxpayers need to know the whole picture.

I know you can't nail it down to nickels and dimes.

Things rise, they fall.

It needs to be transparent where people have a good idea of what they're voting on.

So again, with Mr. Alves, I think that's correct.

You need to open it up and have more dialogue what's going on, whether it happens to be by law just at that particular meeting needs to be opened up.

Another point I want to make with the billboards— we were talking about electronic billboards tonight.

I know it was dialogue with 1,000 feet apart, 500 feet apart between a static billboard, traditional and electronic.

One of the central themes for the— in tenets of the select board is safety of this town.

I didn't hear one question on the safety of these billboards.

There's lots of data on are they distracting to people.

The whole reason you go from a static billboard to a dynamic billboard that's changing every 15 seconds, every 30 seconds, is to draw the eyeballs to the billboard.

That's why they're effective.

But if you're on the highway, it's drawing your eyes from what you're supposed to be doing to the billboard.

But I didn't hear one single— I heard a lot of questions here, but I select one.

I didn't hear one on, are these safe?

What is the data that supports these things?

The accident data?

I didn't hear any of that.

And that's very important for the people of this town and people on highways traveling.

I'm not saying I'm against billboards and advertising, but I should have heard more of, are these safe?

What's the data?

Are we protecting people?

Not just how far are they apart, not just the zoning, not just the planning.

I think it's important, and I think those questions should have been asked to the representatives here tonight, the safety aspects of it.

Because I did a search on it while he was speaking, and there's lots of data on it.

There are multiple states that you pull up quickly that absolutely ban these because of the accidents.

We have cell phones that are distracting.

There's all kinds of distractions for everybody today.

This just adds another layer of distraction.

So I think it needs to be investigated before anybody makes a decision on whether they get electronic billboards in our town.

That's all I've got.

Thank you.

See, there's no other community here.

So other business?

Um, I don't have any other business.

Town Administrator's report?

Uh, nothing at this time.

Okay.

Board of Selectmen liaison reports and comments?

Accounts payable warrants signed?

Does TV9 liaison have anything?

Nothing at this time.

Nothing.

Okay.

Bristol County Advisory Board?

Nothing at this time.

Okay.

Anything new on the Madeira Farm committee?

So we have a meeting scheduled, weather pending, whether we get 0 inches of snow or 18 inches of snow.

We have a meeting scheduled for Monday to interview the firms that have put in for a proposal.

So assuming that there's no closures or weather events, then we'll go forward.

If there is, then we're going to have to postpone that.

But there's no postponement date yet.

That's the 26th.

Yes, 26th, Monday.

Okay.

The Public Library Building Committee?

Nothing at this time for that.

Well, I'll give you something.

You need to set a date for another meeting.

Oh yeah.

Madeira Swam took up— took on Monday at 6 o'clock this time.

Okay, comments?

Michael?

Nothing.

Nothing.

Chris, uh, 2 things.

Did we ever hear back from Bransky regarding that marijuana license down by Hollister Road?

Uh, we may have.

Let me— I'll double-check.

I'll get that in the morning.

And then the other thing you brought up earlier, actually, the flock cameras.

Can, um, a few years ago when we sat here and talked to the detective sergeant about how many to get in town, can you just, um, get a follow-up with him and seeing if we have enough, if he thinks we should get more.

Um, we allowed him— he wanted a certain number, we allowed him to get more.

Yeah, to get all the points.

And, um, just an update on that.

It's been a few years.

If he's satisfied with the locations, with the number that he currently has.

Thank you.

Is that it, Chris?

That's it.

Pam?

Um, just a reminder, if we can get an agenda item to discuss the old town hall building and what we want to do about moving forward, potential plans.

I know there were some ideas tossed out at the town meeting, and I think we as a board should discuss that and kind of come up with some type of plan of moving forward with that building.

That's it.

Okay, Gary.

Yes, did we, uh, do anything more about the, uh, traffic light at Luther's Corners?

Remember I suggested that gentleman in town?

Uh, yeah, so I haven't reached out to the gentleman, um, but we did reach out to MassDOT, so we're waiting to hear back from them on that.

Okay.

And then I, I got to get the contact information from the gentleman.

Okay.

So, and then What is the status of the P&S for 911 Taunton Avenue?

So I have the P&S.

I just got to review it.

We were just— I'm just waiting to hear back from Bob on his closing date.

So I want to kind of tie it to his business.

So I'm waiting to hear back from him on that so we can incorporate it.

But once I review it, I should have it to him by early next week for his review and then back before the board for Official vote on it.

Bob or Bill?

Bill.

I'm sorry.

Sorry, I apologize.

Bill Murray, that's, you know, What About Bob?

So sorry.

That it, Mr. Segal?

That is all for tonight.

Thank you.

Okay, the only thing I have for tonight is the north end of town.

Lewis Tree has received the contract from National Grid.

Perform trimming of the trees away from the power lines.

So that's going to be up at the north end of town towards Attleboro and both in Attleboro and Seekonk.

So if you see Lewis Tree around, that's what they're doing.

They'll be doing some line clearance is what they call it.

Okay, everybody good?

Okay, I'll take a— hold on, I'll take a motion to adjourn at 9:28.

Till our next board meeting, Wednesday, February 4th, same time, same place, 6 PM right here, um, to enter into executive session, not to reconvene in open session for, for anything.

For A, to consider accepting executive session minutes of January 7th, 2026.

So moved, Gary Sega.

Second, Pam Posey.

Carrie Singaray.

Rosier.

Prizoray.

Mook Lillian.

Michelle Hangzai.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Caroline.