Thumbnail for Hardwick, MA Board of Selectmen Meeting 9/29/22

Hardwick Road Pump Station Project and Article 97 Opinion

Original title: Hardwick, MA Board of Selectmen Meeting 9/29/22

These meeting notes are AI-generated and unofficial. They are provided for convenience and are not official Town records or approved municipal minutes. Verify all details using the source video and official Town documents.

Meeting details

Date

September 30, 2022

Duration

41m

Decisions

1 recorded

Action Items

4 assigned

Summary

The Hardwick Board of Selectmen convened to address critical town matters, including a legal opinion on Article 97 applicability to the proposed pump station site and the award of the Hardwick Road Pump Station bid. Legal counsel affirmed that Article 97 does not apply to the property, allowing the Board to proceed with the pump station. The Board unanimously voted to conditionally award the pump station upgrade project to Ricardi Brothers Inc. for $1,774,498, pending USDA approval and receipt of necessary documentation, marking a significant step forward for the long-awaited sewer system project. Discussions also included the Conservation Commission's role and responsibilities regarding the property.

Browse meeting notes

Now viewing

Discussion Highlights

Legal counsel presented an opinion affirming that the proposed pump station site is not subject to Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution, based on a review of property acquisition and use history.
The property was acquired in 1911 for agricultural purposes (apple orchards) and the Hardwick fair, not with a permanent restriction for environmental conservation.
No formal declaration or recorded restriction permanently designated the land for Article 97 purposes, and past uses were inconsistent with preservation.
The Board of Selectmen can designate a portion of the property for the sewer pump station.
The Board deferred formal acknowledgment of the Article 97 legal opinion to allow members more time to review the document.
The Hardwick Road Pump Station bid award process was reviewed, confirming Ricardi Brothers Inc. as the lowest, most responsible, and responsive bidder.
The bid award is conditional upon USDA review for federal purposes and the contractor providing required bonds and insurance.
Discussion included the potential future inclusion of "additive alternative number two" (gravity line) for increased system efficiency and long-term cost savings, pending favorable numbers from the treatment plant bid.
The Conservation Commission raised questions regarding their roles and responsibilities concerning the property, particularly the interpretation of "care and custody" mentioned in historical documents.

Transcript (6,859 words)

Lightly cleaned for readability. Each timestamp opens the video at that point.

00:00:00
I've been meeting for September 29 2022 to order a little bit late sorry 606 because of technical difficulties so on the agenda for the meeting tonight is the call to order the town of Roderick Greenwich Road Pump Station bid award and adjournment
00:00:22
Do we want to wait for Scott to join us perhaps while we're waiting Greg would you like to speak briefly about the uh to to the board about the um the
00:00:40
Opinion or your response to the letter we were copied on relative to article 97.
00:00:48
Yes thank you through Madam chair good evening I'm sorry I think you're okay okay good evening my name is Greg corbo of town town of Hardwick and as you may recall a few weeks ago we were asked um to
00:01:09
Look at the current proposed site for The Pump Station for part of the sewer system and whether that site was subject to article 97 of the Massachusetts [Music] article 7 provides um certain
00:01:28
Procedural protections for lands that have been dedicated to Environmental Conservation cultural uses so we originally looked at this issue and determined that the property was not
00:01:47
Subject to article 97 at time we had just the deed by which the town acquired interest in the land and because that deed had no restrictions on the town's use of the land we formed the opinion that it was [Music]
00:02:06
It was not um subject to issuance of that opinion we were provided with further documentation concerning the the position of the property as well as a subsequent transfer of a portion of the property to the Conservation Commission so as a result of that those

[00:00:00] I've been meeting for September 29 2022 [00:00:04] um [00:00:05] to order a little bit late sorry 606 [00:00:08] because of technical difficulties so on [00:00:11] the agenda for the meeting tonight is um [00:00:13] the call to order the town of Roderick [00:00:15] Greenwich Road Pump Station bid award [00:00:17] and adjournment [00:00:20] um [00:00:22] do we want to wait for Scott to join us [00:00:26] um perhaps while we're waiting [00:00:28] um [00:00:30] Greg would you like to speak briefly [00:00:33] about [00:00:34] um [00:00:35] the uh to to the board about the um the [00:00:40] opinion or your response to [00:00:43] the letter we were copied on relative to [00:00:46] article 97. [00:00:48] yes thank you through Madam chair uh [00:00:50] good evening [00:00:53] I'm sorry I think you're okay okay [00:00:58] um good evening [00:00:59] um my name is Greg corbo of town [00:01:01] town of Hardwick and as you may recall [00:01:05] um a few weeks ago we were asked um to [00:01:09] look at the current [00:01:11] um proposed site for [00:01:13] um The Pump Station [00:01:15] um for part of the sewer system [00:01:18] um and whether that site was subject to [00:01:20] article 97 of the Massachusetts [00:01:23] [Music] [00:01:25] um article 7 provides um certain [00:01:28] procedural protections [00:01:30] um for lands that have been [00:01:33] um dedicated to [00:01:35] um Environmental Conservation [00:01:37] um [00:01:38] cultural uses [00:01:40] um so we originally looked at this issue [00:01:43] and [00:01:44] um determined that the property was not [00:01:47] subject to article 97 at time we had [00:01:51] just the deed by which the town acquired [00:01:54] interest in the land [00:01:55] um and because that deed had no [00:01:58] restrictions on the town's use of the [00:02:01] land we formed the opinion that it was [00:02:03] [Music] [00:02:06] it was not um subject to issuance of [00:02:08] that opinion we were provided with [00:02:10] further documentation concerning the [00:02:15] the position of the property as well as [00:02:17] a subsequent transfer of a portion of [00:02:20] the property to the Conservation [00:02:22] Commission [00:02:23] um so as a result of that those [00:02:26] documents we went back and [00:02:28] reconsidered our original opinion [00:02:31] however we remain at the conclusion that [00:02:34] the property is not subject to article [00:02:37] 97 and bearing in mind that if a [00:02:40] property is subject to article 97 then [00:02:44] there are certain procedural steps that [00:02:47] need to be taken in order to change the [00:02:50] use of that land [00:02:51] um to a use that is [00:02:53] inconsistent with the article 97 [00:02:57] um and those procedural steps include [00:03:00] um approval of a two-thirds vote of both [00:03:03] houses of the legislature [00:03:05] um and approval the um Secretary of [00:03:07] environmental Affairs who generally uh [00:03:10] requires the designation of [00:03:13] um [00:03:14] replacement property for property [00:03:17] of article 97 so again we looked at [00:03:21] these these original documents and [00:03:23] um what we found was that [00:03:26] um in order for article 97 to apply the [00:03:29] property must have been acquired for an [00:03:32] article 97 Purpose with an intention [00:03:35] that [00:03:37] um that the land to be permanently [00:03:41] to that purpose in some sort of formal [00:03:44] way that prevents its use for any other [00:03:48] purpose [00:03:50] um alternatively [00:03:52] um lens that is not acquired for an [00:03:54] article 97 purpose can later be so [00:03:57] designated Again by by a formal [00:04:00] declaration [00:04:01] so with respect to this property we [00:04:04] found that in um [00:04:06] 1910 the town received a donation of [00:04:10] funds for the purposes of purchasing [00:04:14] land for the benefit of the Hardwick [00:04:17] fair and other [00:04:19] agricultural purposes within the town [00:04:23] um and that in 1911 town meeting [00:04:26] authorized the purchase of this parcel [00:04:30] and another parcel in town [00:04:33] um using funds from that trust that was [00:04:37] established [00:04:38] according to the town meeting vote in [00:04:41] 1911 the subject property [00:04:44] um was was for the purpose of quote [00:04:46] unquote agricultural work and at that [00:04:49] time the property had a number of apple [00:04:52] orchards [00:04:56] um and there was a dual Pro purpose [00:04:58] there for the property to be used as [00:05:00] both a residence and an apple orchard [00:05:04] um as you know of the the use of the [00:05:06] land as an apple orchard or [00:05:09] Ant Farm has been long since [00:05:11] discontinued [00:05:13] um and we found no record to suggest [00:05:16] that the um the use of the land for [00:05:20] agricultural purposes has been [00:05:22] permanently restricted either through [00:05:23] the filing or recording of an APR or [00:05:26] through any other type of restriction [00:05:28] and in fact we know that the property [00:05:31] has not been used for culture but it has [00:05:34] been used for purposes of the [00:05:36] fairgrounds [00:05:37] um and for use of other uses by the [00:05:40] public [00:05:40] which is not consistent with [00:05:42] preservation of the land [00:05:45] in addition to that in 1998 a portion of [00:05:50] the land was sold to a third party by a [00:05:53] town meeting vote and there's no [00:05:56] evidence that the [00:05:57] that's applied with the requirements of [00:05:59] articles [00:06:01] or that it viewed any portion of this [00:06:03] properties being [00:06:05] seven so [00:06:07] um we remain at the opinion that [00:06:10] um this property was not acquired for [00:06:13] purposes of article 97 and we are also [00:06:16] of the opinion that these the suckling [00:06:18] vote in 1998 was not sufficient to [00:06:22] designate this as article 97 land [00:06:26] um again that vote did two things [00:06:28] first it authorized a trade [00:06:30] part of the property to a third party by [00:06:33] sale and then it transferred another [00:06:36] point of the property to the [00:06:39] Conservation Commission [00:06:40] for concert [00:06:42] purposes however nothing was recorded [00:06:45] there is no conservation restriction in [00:06:48] the chain of title for the property [00:06:50] um and as I indicated there was no [00:06:52] evidence to suggest that [00:06:54] the land has [00:06:56] two conservation or open [00:06:58] s purposes to the contrary the property [00:07:02] has long been used as the site of Affair [00:07:04] where many people and animals animal [00:07:06] congregate which is something that is [00:07:10] diametrically opposed to conservation [00:07:13] which is you know leaving land [00:07:15] undisturbed in its original [00:07:18] um native state so [00:07:21] the absence of you know use of the land [00:07:24] for conservation purposes or formal [00:07:26] dedication of it [00:07:28] um and the absence of any evidence to [00:07:30] suggest that any of these uses or [00:07:33] designations are permanent [00:07:35] um we remain of of the opinion that [00:07:37] article 97 does not apply likewise we [00:07:40] remain of the opinion that flight plan [00:07:42] approval does not apply and therefore [00:07:45] um based on the the town meeting votes [00:07:47] that have already occurred [00:07:49] um the the board is able to designate a [00:07:53] portion of this property [00:07:55] um for use as a sewer pump station [00:07:58] oops [00:08:01] thank you graphic [00:08:03] um [00:08:04] any questions Kelly or Rob [00:08:08] for Greg [00:08:11] so you were both um forward we received [00:08:14] this um late this afternoon you were [00:08:17] both uh forwarded a copy of this [00:08:19] recently [00:08:21] um so we can [00:08:23] um accept this [00:08:26] um this this evening or uh you probably [00:08:29] neither of you have really had the [00:08:30] opportunity to so [00:08:34] were [00:08:41] she's stuck yeah you're [00:08:46] you're things [00:08:47] um [00:08:48] did I freeze yes I'm gonna turn my okay [00:08:53] so I'm gonna turn my video off it'll [00:08:54] probably be a little bit better [00:08:56] um so let me start again [00:08:58] um so um I know that both Kelly and Rob [00:09:01] just received this document recently um [00:09:04] we did get it later this afternoon [00:09:06] um so [00:09:08] it's really the preference of [00:09:11] um [00:09:15] thing this [00:09:17] prefer on accepting this until our next [00:09:20] meeting or if you're prepared to [00:09:22] um you know accept the response from KP [00:09:26] law that was just outlined by Greg at [00:09:28] tonight's meeting [00:09:32] I am comfortable with either way nothing [00:09:34] has changed we did acknowledge receipt [00:09:38] of the last one [00:09:40] um so I guess I would look for Rob's [00:09:42] input as well [00:09:51] Rob do we still have you [00:10:03] know [00:10:06] I know he's traveling so [00:10:08] um [00:10:10] well let's continue on we can defer that [00:10:13] until [00:10:15] um [00:10:15] let's just make sure he's still on [00:10:23] he may have muted himself [00:10:26] he doesn't look muted though [00:10:40] okay [00:10:46] can you hear me now [00:10:47] we can [00:10:50] [Music] [00:10:52] uh well [00:10:55] I heard what Greg said [00:10:58] yes I [00:11:00] I I'm a little confused with the details [00:11:03] of this I just [00:11:05] hope that he's got an ironclad case here [00:11:07] because [00:11:10] Steel's been used as a hate field not [00:11:12] just the fairground but they are [00:11:14] culturally used [00:11:16] um but [00:11:17] I mean he is a lawyer so I to go in this [00:11:20] opinion so I [00:11:22] I haven't read the opinion I don't know [00:11:25] if Clinica sent out but [00:11:28] so Kelly Maybe [00:11:32] recommend that everybody reads the [00:11:34] opinion before you acknowledge your seat [00:11:35] and uh you know that to recognize that [00:11:39] the attorneys understand and are of the [00:11:43] mind that the use is not changing to put [00:11:45] the accessory use of this public utility [00:11:48] on this so it'll still behave it'll [00:11:51] still be used for the fair Etc [00:11:54] but that's in the letter so you might [00:11:56] want to you know I don't it's completely [00:11:58] up to you [00:11:59] um I just think I could give you um you [00:12:02] know perspective of [00:12:03] reading it and observing it before you [00:12:05] acknowledge your seat of it [00:12:07] which could be done on Tuesday on at [00:12:08] your next meeting [00:12:12] with that [00:12:17] okay so [00:12:19] um between now and Tuesday if um Kelly [00:12:21] and Rob if you can take a look at the [00:12:23] letter I have read it and um [00:12:26] we'll acknowledge a receipt of it at our [00:12:29] meeting on Tuesday [00:12:32] um I will I will tell you though after [00:12:34] reading it [00:12:37] uh Greg is actually given more much more [00:12:40] detail [00:12:42] um important detail the the letter [00:12:44] summarizes their opinion but I think um [00:12:47] we've gotten you've heard yeah a little [00:12:49] bit more detail than um [00:12:52] that supports what's in the opinion so [00:12:56] okay [00:12:58] um so we will [00:12:59] um we'll we will acknowledge receipt of [00:13:01] that on Tuesday [00:13:03] um second uh we're sort of um next on [00:13:06] the agenda is the town of private [00:13:08] Greenwich Road Pump Station bid award [00:13:12] um Justin would you like to speak on [00:13:14] this or would you like us just to go [00:13:17] ahead and [00:13:18] review the process Nicole review the [00:13:20] process [00:13:24] I mean I'll leave that to you I mean I [00:13:25] could just give a brief overview you [00:13:27] know if we're open for the project [00:13:30] um EPC has put together a recommendation [00:13:32] to award members everybody you know you [00:13:34] know to have um [00:13:36] Nicole always provided that [00:13:38] we're recommending you know uh who [00:13:41] should be awarded the projects you know [00:13:43] what should be awarded Etc if you want [00:13:45] me to get into the details that's fine [00:13:47] um [00:13:48] I'll let you speak as to what you know [00:13:50] you know tent tonight is which I believe [00:13:52] to be [00:13:53] to vote to accept this recommendation to [00:13:56] award so that we can let USDA know [00:13:58] tomorrow prior to the October first [00:14:00] deadline Saturday [00:14:03] um and stick to you know meeting all the [00:14:05] requirements of the letter of conditions [00:14:07] and keep the USDA loan and funding you [00:14:09] know in place and and [00:14:12] I'll let Nicole [00:14:14] you know speak if she wants me to get [00:14:15] into the the specifics I'm not sure how [00:14:18] much you know people have already [00:14:19] reviewed this letter and so on so I'll [00:14:22] turn it over to you guys [00:14:25] Nicole do you want to do you want to [00:14:27] field it or do you want me to review the [00:14:28] memory no I can absolutely do that okay [00:14:32] uh so we opened the bibs the other day [00:14:34] and then Justin took them back to the [00:14:37] office to review them for completion and [00:14:40] for you know accuracy and see that they [00:14:43] are qualified uh you know for their [00:14:45] qualifications and [00:14:48] um then you know with Massachusetts [00:14:50] procurement of course you have to go [00:14:52] with the lowest [00:14:54] qualified bidder so I know that you know [00:14:57] the three of you understand that for the [00:14:59] public uh when you are doing procurement [00:15:01] you have to go with the lowest [00:15:03] responsible and responsive bidder unless [00:15:06] there is a very well documented reason [00:15:08] that you shouldn't [00:15:10] um and so after reviewing all of the [00:15:13] recommendations the ricardi uh bid was [00:15:18] the lowest and most responsive and [00:15:20] responsible and has been reviewed by uh [00:15:24] DPC it is conditional on USDA reviewing [00:15:29] it as well and making sure all the [00:15:31] qualifications are there for federal uh [00:15:33] purposes [00:15:35] um but [00:15:36] seems like [00:15:38] um you know a really great proposal and [00:15:41] I along with DPC recommend that you uh [00:15:46] go with the recommended bidder who would [00:15:49] be ricardi or Richard I'm not sure the [00:15:51] pronunciation [00:15:53] um but they were the lowest bidder [00:15:56] lowest responsible and responsive bidder [00:16:00] so yeah I'm just going to say out of it [00:16:02] just to give a frame of reference [00:16:04] um Richard is it retardy [00:16:07] yeah okay okay we're tardy uh Brothers [00:16:11] um their um base bid was [00:16:15] 1.1726998 the highest one that we [00:16:18] received was 2 million 269. [00:16:21] um and the rest of them were sort of [00:16:22] spread in between [00:16:24] um [00:16:26] and so [00:16:27] um [00:16:28] so Nicole and Dustin when we are looking [00:16:32] at the [00:16:34] um [00:16:35] the um [00:16:40] your summary [00:16:42] um I want to be sure that the motion is [00:16:45] appropriate um that we're actually [00:16:46] staying the most appropriately so we are [00:16:49] actually [00:16:51] um your recommendation is to approve [00:16:53] um our charity Brothers Inc for the base [00:16:57] bid plus additive alternative number one [00:17:00] is that correct [00:17:02] correct [00:17:04] possible by USDA and then contingent [00:17:07] upon receipt and review of uh the [00:17:09] required bonds and insurance of richardi [00:17:11] Brothers okay [00:17:13] basically that that last sentence there [00:17:15] on the first page of that memorandum [00:17:16] pretty much covers it yep you got it [00:17:20] Kelly or Rob do you have any uh items of [00:17:23] discussion we don't have Rob [00:17:26] Bing UMB [00:17:28] he's gone [00:17:36] Kelly do you have any questions on [00:17:39] no I don't I've read this letter [00:17:41] okay [00:17:49] I'm trying to text something up [00:17:53] thank you [00:17:54] well while we're waiting [00:17:56] um [00:17:57] Nicole is there anything else relative [00:17:59] to this that we should talk about or [00:18:01] know [00:18:02] um I don't think so other than you know [00:18:04] this is a typical obviously uh bid award [00:18:08] that a town would do for any of its work [00:18:12] um except for USDA so USDA then needs to [00:18:16] also vet this company and make sure that [00:18:19] they have all of the requirements that [00:18:21] the federal government will need so [00:18:23] there's uh even more than would be [00:18:25] required if the town was paying for it [00:18:28] so [00:18:29] um you know that's the only thing is [00:18:31] that once the board [00:18:34] approves it you know it is conditionally [00:18:37] approved to the USDA than going through [00:18:41] their vetting process and uh and and [00:18:44] being okay with that and giving their [00:18:46] letter you know their sticker of [00:18:47] approval [00:18:49] um [00:18:50] Scott was there for a bit open opening [00:18:52] two and he's here now and um so he's [00:18:56] well I think he's more aware obviously [00:18:59] of what it entails than I am but uh you [00:19:03] know I think we're all on the same page [00:19:04] and [00:19:06] um you know we would always recommend [00:19:09] that we go with our Engineers [00:19:11] recommendation and the lowest bidder [00:19:13] lowest responsible and responsive bitter [00:19:18] Scott is there anything you wanted to [00:19:19] mention [00:19:28] Ed my biggest thing is that um you know [00:19:30] I really hope that in the end there is [00:19:32] some point alternate two can get done [00:19:35] because that would be the gravity [00:19:37] portion of this proposal [00:19:40] and gravity line is just a win-win for [00:19:42] the town [00:19:43] it's going to make the system more [00:19:46] efficient it's going to make it pump [00:19:47] faster [00:19:48] and it's going to have no future cost to [00:19:50] the town compared to what he Force main [00:19:53] that's put in [00:19:54] wait does it all urge everyone involved [00:19:57] to to Really push for that gravity [00:19:59] section of the line [00:20:00] so the alternate two is the gravity [00:20:02] section and the reason that it was being [00:20:06] um sort of on hold is because you know [00:20:10] with everything so [00:20:12] um uh up in the air that we want to go [00:20:16] out to bed at least for the first uh [00:20:19] I always do a station uh treatment plant [00:20:22] to make sure that that's going to come [00:20:24] in so all of the money can can be used [00:20:27] as much as it possibly can [00:20:29] um efficiently so I think that it's wise [00:20:33] you know to sort of just hold off on [00:20:35] Alternate too and see what the what the [00:20:38] bid comes out for the first [00:20:41] um treatment plant and then if we see [00:20:43] some favorable numbers because this bid [00:20:45] came in favorable we could add it back [00:20:47] in and I think it shows USDA that we're [00:20:50] trying to be fiscally responsible [00:20:52] and you know really doing our due [00:20:54] diligence to make this project as [00:20:56] affordable as possible but I completely [00:20:59] hear Scott and I will it's on the front [00:21:02] burner and once that second bid comes in [00:21:04] for the treatment plan I will most [00:21:07] definitely uh request USDA and and and [00:21:10] through of course DPC that we put [00:21:12] alternate two back on the table [00:21:19] Rob's back on Julie yep sorry I was [00:21:22] trying to unmute myself [00:21:24] um so Rob I'm not sure how much you [00:21:26] heard [00:21:27] before you weren't there [00:21:30] um [00:21:34] I all I heard was her talk about [00:21:36] alternate too [00:21:38] okay so [00:21:40] um [00:21:41] I'm not sure how much you caught of [00:21:43] Justin and Nicole talking about the bid [00:21:45] process but there were five bidders as [00:21:47] you know from the letter [00:21:48] um or Charlie Brothers Inc was the [00:21:50] lowest bid as you know so what we are [00:21:53] talking about and the ultimate goal is [00:21:56] to [00:21:57] um recommend that the town of Hardwick [00:22:00] conditionally award the project number [00:22:02] one the Harvard Road pumping system [00:22:04] upgrades project which is a base fit an [00:22:07] additive alternative one to charity [00:22:09] Brothers of Worcester and the amount of [00:22:11] one million seven seventy four 498 [00:22:14] subject to approval by USA D.A and [00:22:17] contingent upon receipt and review of [00:22:19] the contact contractually required bonds [00:22:21] and insurance certificates from richardi [00:22:24] Brothers Inc [00:22:27] um [00:22:29] so that's what we have before us [00:22:34] future [00:22:36] Rob any any comments on that [00:22:42] no [00:22:46] was that a no from Rob [00:22:48] no no comments [00:22:51] okay so [00:22:53] um I would I would make a motion [00:22:56] that we [00:22:58] um [00:23:00] accept the recommendation from PC and [00:23:03] continue [00:23:04] conditionally award project number one [00:23:08] pumping station upgrade project [00:23:10] to ricardi Brothers of Worcester Mass [00:23:12] space fit of [00:23:15] 1726 [00:23:16] 998 dollars plus alternate additive [00:23:20] alternative number one for 47 500 for a [00:23:24] total of 1 million [00:23:25] seven hundred seventy four dollars four [00:23:27] hundred and ninety eight dollars sorry [00:23:29] one million seven hundred and seventy [00:23:32] four thousand four hundred and ninety [00:23:33] eight million [00:23:35] um [00:23:36] subject to approval by USDA and [00:23:38] contingent upon receipt and review of [00:23:40] contractual required bonds and insurance [00:23:42] certificates from richardi Brothers Bank [00:23:48] is there a second [00:23:53] okay so it's like [00:23:56] actually we're on Zoom so we're going to [00:23:57] need to call the roll but but that's [00:24:00] okay it was moved by Kelly and seconded [00:24:02] by Rob any other discussion [00:24:06] foreign [00:24:08] so let me just recap the motion the [00:24:11] motion was to accept the recommendation [00:24:15] of DPC [00:24:17] um relative to the town of Hardwick and [00:24:20] conditionally awarding project number [00:24:21] one Hardwick Road pumping system [00:24:24] upgrades project the base bid an [00:24:27] additive alternate number one to ricardi [00:24:29] Brothers Inc of Worcester Mass in the [00:24:31] amount of [00:24:33] 1774 [00:24:34] 498 dollars subject to approval by USDA [00:24:38] and contingent upon receipt and review [00:24:40] of the contractually required bonds [00:24:42] Insurance certificates from ricardi [00:24:45] Brothers Inc has been moved and seconded [00:24:48] if there's no other discussion I'm going [00:24:50] to call the roll [00:24:52] Kelly Kemp [00:24:54] yes [00:24:56] Robert Ruggles [00:24:58] yes [00:25:00] Julie clink is a yes so the motion is [00:25:02] unanimous [00:25:05] um so from a procedural standpoint [00:25:08] um we have just [00:25:10] um as you heard Justin say so Justin [00:25:12] perhaps you can if you're still with us [00:25:15] now that we've conditionally approved [00:25:17] the [00:25:18] um [00:25:19] the project for ricardi brothers could [00:25:22] you just briefly tell us next steps [00:25:27] so first thing tomorrow I will call uh [00:25:30] Joe delbeau who's running you know this [00:25:32] checked at USDA I'll inform him of this [00:25:35] decision uh they may want you know [00:25:38] something official just documenting the [00:25:39] vote we'll get that over to them [00:25:42] um in the meantime with your approval I [00:25:45] will send a notice of conditional [00:25:46] acceptance of bid letter to richardi [00:25:49] Brothers to alert them to this [00:25:52] um obviously it'll be conditioned upon [00:25:54] USDA approval and bonds and insurance [00:25:56] and that will allow them to start [00:25:59] basically moving on the paperwork end of [00:26:01] things putting bonds and insurance to [00:26:02] get to go for review [00:26:05] um so those are kind of the two next [00:26:06] steps in parallel getting USDA you know [00:26:08] alerting them and having them go through [00:26:10] their vetting process as Nicole you know [00:26:12] talked about [00:26:13] and then alerting ricardi basically to [00:26:16] start preparing the paperwork that you [00:26:18] know this approval is conditioned upon [00:26:20] so we can review that [00:26:23] great thank you and then um I guess you [00:26:25] know Subs [00:26:27] sequence of that too I should just [00:26:28] mention you know if everything checks [00:26:32] check pairing physical [00:26:35] um you know with those to be executed [00:26:36] between uh both parties and USDA [00:26:40] that's it [00:26:43] thank you thank you Justin [00:26:47] I just have a quick question if because [00:26:50] knowing that Nicole is going to be away [00:26:52] for a couple of weeks on a planned you [00:26:54] know uh time away [00:26:56] I'm just you know is that something that [00:26:58] we will have to act on quickly we may [00:27:01] have to you know put together a meeting [00:27:02] while she's gone if those need to be [00:27:04] signed [00:27:07] I don't know I mean I guess we'll just [00:27:09] have to wait and see [00:27:12] Justin can you give us an indication [00:27:14] oh yeah just talking you know right now [00:27:17] I don't think the actual physical [00:27:18] signing of the contracts will [00:27:20] um you know have to happen in the next [00:27:22] two weeks I think USDA typically takes [00:27:25] five to ten [00:27:26] days to do their review so we're [00:27:28] probably looking at a couple weeks [00:27:30] before you know we actually even hear [00:27:32] back from them so I think I think that's [00:27:34] good timing probably for your trip [00:27:35] nickel perfect [00:27:38] thank you [00:27:41] any other questions for Justin or for [00:27:44] Greg [00:27:50] okay so um I just want to say something [00:27:54] here [00:27:55] um [00:27:56] we're at September 29th October 1st was [00:27:59] our deadline I just as the chair I just [00:28:03] want to say a couple words I want to say [00:28:04] a huge thank you to Kelly and to Rob [00:28:08] um [00:28:09] rob you have not been in the process [00:28:11] quite as long as us on the in the seat [00:28:13] that you're in but I know you've been [00:28:14] watching the process for a long time [00:28:17] um process started long before Kelly and [00:28:19] I were even [00:28:20] um on the board [00:28:22] um there has been a lot of work that has [00:28:24] been done by uh the three of us [00:28:28] um Nicole has entered the scene and sort [00:28:30] of make you know made everything happen [00:28:34] um as well [00:28:35] um but a huge shout out to the two of [00:28:37] you I know this is not an easy process I [00:28:40] know for the folks that are sitting on [00:28:41] the meeting [00:28:42] um listening [00:28:44] this is not um [00:28:46] the project isn't [00:28:48] um I I envisioned us standing around [00:28:51] popping champagne and celebrating and it [00:28:54] feels like this has been anything but [00:28:56] that [00:28:58] um it's been a lot of hard work but I [00:29:00] want to say a huge thank you to Kelly [00:29:02] and Rob for all of your input [00:29:05] um it's not been an easy process I want [00:29:08] to say thank you to the people who have [00:29:09] been involved in the process and voicing [00:29:11] your opinions [00:29:12] um [00:29:13] they have not gone unheard [00:29:16] um [00:29:17] you know over over cocktail many moons [00:29:20] after this project is done we can talk [00:29:22] about [00:29:23] um all of the heartache and work that [00:29:25] went in the last year or so to try to [00:29:28] secure this money back [00:29:30] um also a huge thank you to Justin and [00:29:33] to Dave for the guidance along the way [00:29:37] um and of course a huge thank you to [00:29:38] Greg and KP law for the many phone calls [00:29:41] many letters we're not done yet we still [00:29:44] have them but appreciate the guidance [00:29:47] um [00:29:48] also a huge uh thank you to Scott [00:29:52] um Scott you've not been operating under [00:29:53] the best conditions for a period of time [00:29:55] and we're on our way to get things [00:29:58] working right for you and for the town [00:30:00] and also a huge thank you to Nicole [00:30:04] um many phone calls many late nights [00:30:06] many calls with [00:30:08] legal counsel [00:30:10] um USDA Justin and Dave any other [00:30:14] parties that have had concerns or [00:30:17] questions and have visited Nicole [00:30:19] occasionally or frequently [00:30:22] to voice opinions and concerns uh just a [00:30:25] huge thank you so [00:30:28] um again I wish we were all together [00:30:30] celebrating with champagne or something [00:30:32] some may not feel it's something to [00:30:34] celebrate but you know I think we have [00:30:37] to look at the end goal the road has [00:30:39] been a little rocky [00:30:41] well let's face it it's been a lot Rocky [00:30:44] um [00:30:44] and it hasn't started with the three [00:30:47] board members but you know it will [00:30:49] hopefully and or be on its way with the [00:30:52] three board members in the help of [00:30:53] Nicole and [00:30:55] um our you know professional Partners [00:30:57] but [00:30:59] um this is sort of a momentous [00:31:02] um day for the town that we're able to [00:31:04] to you know actually move forward with [00:31:07] this project [00:31:08] um it won't I [00:31:10] I don't work in construction but for [00:31:12] those of you who do [00:31:14] um [00:31:15] you know we'll have more bumps but as [00:31:17] long as we can move together and um not [00:31:20] always a great we don't always always [00:31:21] have to agree that's the beauty of [00:31:23] having a committee or a board we can [00:31:25] listen to different opinions that's the [00:31:27] beauty of having interested citizens [00:31:30] um [00:31:31] coming forward with concerns and us [00:31:34] doing our best to try to address them [00:31:36] with our professional Partners so thank [00:31:38] you all [00:31:39] um and um I appreciate every single one [00:31:42] of you and we are on to the next step so [00:31:45] this is exciting [00:31:46] um we're on to bigger and other [00:31:48] different things next week so it doesn't [00:31:51] seem like we get a chance to rest too [00:31:53] much after going through all of the hard [00:31:55] work but [00:31:56] um that's what progress is Right moving [00:31:59] forward and continuing to move forward [00:32:00] so thank you to everybody Nicole I don't [00:32:03] know if you want to say anything or for [00:32:04] Kelly or Rob or if we're good to go [00:32:07] thank you Julie [00:32:10] I have a question [00:32:12] sure Bell go ahead [00:32:15] um [00:32:15] so uh [00:32:18] this [00:32:19] um whatever this document is from KP law [00:32:23] can our board get a copy of this [00:32:27] um and in fact I guess the real question [00:32:30] is [00:32:31] um [00:32:32] whatever was written is this [00:32:35] intended as a response to the questions [00:32:38] that we posed in the Conservation [00:32:40] Commission memo [00:32:42] I don't know if you guys have an answer [00:32:44] to this yet [00:32:45] so um I'm not sure if you were on Bill [00:32:48] when we talked about it we haven't [00:32:50] formally acknowledged receipt of the [00:32:51] letter [00:32:52] um from KPA law uh it just was forwarded [00:32:55] to us this afternoon and Kelly and Rob [00:32:57] have not had the chance to review it so [00:32:59] they have been forwarded the letter once [00:33:02] we will acknowledge it on Tuesday we [00:33:04] will acknowledge receipt of it so it [00:33:06] will be once that acknowledged that [00:33:08] acknowledgment is done [00:33:10] um absolutely free to have this letter [00:33:13] is not in response um well Greg let I'd [00:33:17] rather let Greg speak perhaps but my [00:33:19] understanding is that this is in [00:33:21] response to specifically article uh um [00:33:25] something that was something that we [00:33:27] were copied on relative to [00:33:29] [Music] [00:33:30] um [00:33:31] KP law and and an opinion on article 97 [00:33:34] I do not believe it's directly in [00:33:37] response to your concerns as [00:33:39] conservation but Greg do you want to [00:33:40] answer that for Bill [00:33:50] oh sorry for the delay there [00:33:52] um uh good evening um Bill yes so um the [00:33:55] letter is not in specific response to [00:33:59] um the concerns raised by the [00:34:01] Conservation Commission [00:34:03] um it really just goes to the authority [00:34:06] of the board of Selectmen to use a [00:34:09] portion of this property for a sewer [00:34:12] pump station [00:34:13] um I'm certainly happy to talk to you [00:34:15] about you know whatever concerns that [00:34:17] that you have as a Conservation [00:34:19] Commission going forward [00:34:21] um you know as I sit here now recall [00:34:23] that one of those concerns was with [00:34:25] respect to [00:34:26] um [00:34:27] the notice of intent that had been filed [00:34:29] in the designation of the location and [00:34:31] it's my understanding that that [00:34:33] particular issue has been resolved [00:34:36] um and really with respect to the the [00:34:39] remainder of the property your role as a [00:34:42] Conservation Commission does not change [00:34:44] in my opinion [00:34:45] um so you know whatever the Conservation [00:34:47] Commission was doing with this property [00:34:50] before it will continue to do that [00:34:53] now [00:34:55] um there will just be a pump station on [00:34:57] a small portion of it [00:35:01] thanks Greg so um I hope we can see some [00:35:05] kind of responses to the actual [00:35:06] questions that we posed in our memo [00:35:09] so [00:35:11] um I guess we'll wait and see whatever [00:35:12] this document looks like and then we'll [00:35:16] decide if we have further questions or [00:35:18] if our questions have been answered [00:35:23] our questions were posed in the memo so [00:35:25] you know anybody can take a look at that [00:35:27] and see what we were hoping to get [00:35:30] answers to [00:35:32] um which wasn't really completely [00:35:33] discussed tonight so take a look and see [00:35:35] what you think [00:35:42] we um make sure that we work with Greg [00:35:45] and Bill yes I will absolutely work with [00:35:47] Greg and Bill and and we will get all of [00:35:49] the questions answered that pertain to [00:35:52] the Conservation Commission regarding [00:35:53] this land for sure [00:35:56] um if any of the questions [00:35:58] uh don't necessarily have Conservation [00:36:01] Commission jurisdiction then we I'm sure [00:36:04] we have an answer in another document [00:36:06] somewhere else so I will help I will [00:36:09] work with you to get the questions [00:36:10] answered [00:36:11] um there you know it is in the care [00:36:13] protection of the Conservation [00:36:14] Commission we'll talk about that more [00:36:16] because obviously I don't think you've [00:36:18] known that for all these years [00:36:20] um you know so uh you know let's we [00:36:22] should have some good dialogue around [00:36:24] that and what you expect for the parcel [00:36:26] and um and and then you know I think [00:36:30] your biggest concern was that you have [00:36:31] camera protection of this parcel and [00:36:34] it's supposed to be staying conservation [00:36:36] land and we still are of the mind that [00:36:38] it's in conservation land it'll still be [00:36:40] used for the for the fair it'll still be [00:36:42] used to hey [00:36:43] um you know maybe we'll have to look at [00:36:45] some things where you know I don't know [00:36:47] what the fair does there does it affect [00:36:50] the conservation of that land and of the [00:36:52] water we might have to have deeper [00:36:54] conversations on that but we will most [00:36:57] definitely make you I will get I will [00:36:59] get all of those answers for you again [00:37:00] if it doesn't have to do with [00:37:02] conservation in that in that in that [00:37:04] memo like dep had said you know there's [00:37:07] certain jurisdictions that you have that [00:37:09] you don't have then I will make sure [00:37:11] that you have the answers to the [00:37:13] questions that may not have pertained to [00:37:15] the Conservation Commission directly [00:37:17] yeah so let me help out by clarifying A [00:37:20] little bit you know we talked about the [00:37:21] two different tracks our board has its [00:37:23] Wetland responsibilities and then there [00:37:25] were some apparent responsibilities that [00:37:27] were designated [00:37:29] to our board [00:37:31] and what I was asking was we'd like some [00:37:33] opinion on paper as to what our roles [00:37:35] and responsibilities really should be [00:37:37] and what we're legally responsible for [00:37:39] so take a look at the questions and you [00:37:43] know that's what we were hoping [00:37:45] um to have a little bit of assistance [00:37:47] from KP law on [00:37:49] um [00:37:50] we would like to know what our role what [00:37:53] our responsibilities are as a board here [00:37:55] when when some of these documents have [00:37:58] mentioned you know under the care and [00:38:00] custody of the Conservation Commission [00:38:02] the land is not owned by the commission [00:38:04] it's not owned by any board it's owned [00:38:06] by the town [00:38:07] we would just like some help [00:38:09] interpreting what care and custody of [00:38:11] the commission really means and legally [00:38:14] what our responsibility should be [00:38:16] so we can do that yeah we're just trying [00:38:19] to be clear about this so you know any [00:38:21] help is appreciated [00:38:24] yes bill I'm thank you for that the [00:38:26] clarification and [00:38:34] your regulatory Authority Under The [00:38:36] Wetlands protection act and that's [00:38:38] likely clear to you because you do that [00:38:40] on a regular basis but [00:38:43] um in terms of what you're supposed to [00:38:44] be doing with this particular property [00:38:47] um you know the town meeting vote [00:38:48] doesn't give you much [00:38:51] um and so you know we can certainly help [00:38:53] you based on off syrians as to what [00:38:56] types of things that you should be doing [00:38:58] as a commission to fulfill your [00:39:00] responsibility as having care custody [00:39:05] we would appreciate that again you know [00:39:07] our questions are worded in the memo and [00:39:10] I spent a lot of time thinking about the [00:39:12] wording so take a look at that everybody [00:39:14] and and help us out [00:39:18] foreign [00:39:19] thank you [00:39:21] thanks Phil [00:39:24] Nicole Kelly rob anyone want to say [00:39:26] anything before we adjourn [00:39:30] Nicole I didn't want to raise my hand in [00:39:33] the zoom because I don't know who's [00:39:34] looking [00:39:36] um I just want to uh respond to your [00:39:38] comments and thank you and thank you all [00:39:40] it really has been a very long and [00:39:43] arduous process to get to where we are [00:39:46] today and I'm very excited that we are [00:39:50] finally moving forward and that the town [00:39:52] is going to [00:39:54] um [00:39:55] really get this much needed work for the [00:39:58] entire utility that it needs and I can [00:40:01] only tell you that I'm working [00:40:02] diligently for the the whole town all of [00:40:06] you uh my the best of my ability and um [00:40:10] and that's what I'll continue to do on [00:40:12] onward and upward to the next project on [00:40:14] Monday so uh you know it's it's uh what [00:40:18] is that um no sleep for the weary or [00:40:21] something like that so it's fine it's [00:40:23] great we've we've conquered this we'll [00:40:25] move on we'll hopefully keep going [00:40:27] forward and then we'll we'll go on to [00:40:29] our next projects as well [00:40:31] I have a lot of Hope and and uh optimism [00:40:34] for hard work for the future and I [00:40:36] certainly do with the three of you as a [00:40:38] borg I've never had such a great board [00:40:41] um the attorneys the engineers all [00:40:45] everybody's been extremely supportive of [00:40:47] the Town staff our residents and I'm [00:40:50] just really excited and looking forward [00:40:52] to the future [00:40:54] thank you [00:40:55] thanks Nicole [00:40:57] telling you rob anything before we [00:40:59] adjourn [00:41:03] no Rob are you still with us [00:41:09] oh boy [00:41:11] okay [00:41:13] he's there [00:41:15] um okay so hearing no other business [00:41:18] um I would um ask for a motion to [00:41:22] adjourn [00:41:23] I will make a motion to adjourn [00:41:27] Robert are you there to second [00:41:35] great has been moved and seconded so um [00:41:38] we are on Zoom so we need to call the [00:41:40] roll Kelly Kemp bye Rob Ruggles [00:41:49] Julie quink is a yes we're assuming Rob [00:41:51] rogels is a yes because he's seconded um [00:41:54] I think he's probably out of service [00:41:56] yeah [00:41:57] so then