Present: Edward Melanson, Harvey Nasuti, John Hathaway, Donna Putt, Deborah Robbins, Mary Ellen Brooks
Convened 6:10 p.m. in Room 124, Town Hall
Mr. Melanson called the Meeting of the Board of Public Works to order at 6:10 pm.
The Board of Public Works signed the Water Department invoices and Water Committments.
Ms. Koffinke and Mr. William Houlihan, 24 Kingsbury Road, discussed with the Board their recent water bill for 166,330 gallons of water usage. A new meter had been installed on October 29, 2004 and Ms. Koffinke indicated the usage since that time coincides with previous water bills. Ms. Putt explained that sometimes outside readers fail and that could be the reason they had received estimated bills for the last two billing cycles. Ms. Putt informed the home owners an option they have is pay the bill in payments. Another option is to have the meter tested for accuracy. Ms. Putt stated that obviously the outside reader had been broken for a long time. Ms. Brooks explained the inside meter was read and showed a much higher usage than previously billed. The usage was 166,330 gallons and was then
billed at the previous rate of $3.29 per l,000 gallons. Mr. Nasuti indicated the industry standard of water usage is 80 gallons per person per day. Ms. Putt requested a nominal deposit, possibly what was indicated on last 6 month bill, and Ms. Koffinke indicated she had done just that. Ms. Putt indicated the meter will be sent out for testing, if there’s an error the Board will deal with it, but if the meter is accurate liability for the water bill is on the home owner. The Board will respond once the meter test results are received. Ms. Robbins made a motion to hold all interest on this bill until meter test results are received. Ms. Putt second. Vote in favor unanimous.
Mr. Melanson indicated next on the Agenda was to discuss with the Board of Selectmen, John McFeeley, James Lehan, and Ramesh Advani, Town Administrator, Robert Markel and Town Counsel, George Hall, the responsibilities, roles and interaction of both Boards. Mr. Melanson started by saying Mr. Vito, at a previous meeting, raised the question as to the responsiblilities, roles and interaction between the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Public Works. Mr. Melanson requests clarification of the joint roles and responsibilities of both Boards especially relevant to the Highway Superintendent.
Mr. Hall addressed his Memo dated December 1, 2004, Re: Interim Board of Public Works, which provides a historical prospective on the implementation of the Special Act creating the Department of Public Works, Chapter 101 of the Acts of 2004. Mr. Melanson stressed his concern with personal liability and Mr. Hall’s response was he’s covered.
Mr. Hall stressed Section 8 of the Act allows the Board of Public Works to delegate authority to the Town Administrator to assist the Board. Chapter 217 of the acts of 1994 gives certain appointing authority to the Town Administrator. Because this Board is a transitional Board, Mr. Hall encourages the Board of Public Works to involve the Town Administrator in the setting up and running of the Department. Mr. Hall clarified a point with Mr. McFeeley regarding the reference “to the Board”. Mr. Hall’s interpretation is from now until 2007 this means Board of Public Works.
Mr. Hall explained that since there is no structure in place for a Department of Public Works, its incumbent upon the Board to keep both existing Departments functional. Mr. Hall stated the BPW’s primary roll within the next 31 months is to effect the merger of both Departments under the leadership of a single person. Mr. Hall went on to say he thought for financial and regulatory reasons the Water Department staff will have to be more distinct than any other components of the DPW. Mr. Hall used for example the Town of Wrentham’s structure having two managers, one being a DPW Director and the other being the Assistant Director who also runs the Water Department. Mr. Hall went on to say that because there are licensing requirements of the people who work in the Water Department, the Board may have to go that
way.
Mr. Advanti discussed his interpretation of the Act and feels the word Board means Board of Selectmen except in Section 5 which mentions interim board. Mr. Advanti went on to say he thought it important the Town Administrator be involved in the day to day operations and not two part time Boards.
Mr. Melanson reiterated Mr. Advnati’s interpretation for clarity. DPW Director oversees two Divisions, Highway and Water, and the Director reports to Mr. Markel. The Board of Public Works helps guide the Department of Public Works,hires the Director who now reports to the Town Administrator. Mr. Melanson asked at that point should the BPW be dissolved. BOS total response was no.
Mr. Lehan offered further explanation utilizing a corporate merger scenario. The Board of Public Works has the significant responsibility of creating the merger. The organizational responsibility of designing what these merged organizations will look like. The day to day has to continue while the Board decides what the merged organizations should look like. Mr. Lehan explained the Board would have oversight of the whole operation but delegate the responsibility of the day to day management to the Town Administrator. Mr. Lehan feels there needs to be a mutual reporting relationship.
Mr. Nasuti explained the BOS had charged the BPW with one thing and now it seems to have changed. Mr. Nasuti explained Mr. Vito now has a liaison between the BPW and the Highway because he no longer reports to the Selectmen.
Mr. Lehan further explains everyone agrees the primary responsibility of this Board is the organization component, create and staff it. Mr. Lehan stated it’s in the Town’s best interest if the day to day be delegated to the Town Administrator.
Mr. Advanti interjected that the Police and Fire Chiefs manage their activities but work through the Town Administrator. Mr. Advanti stated the Highway and Water should do the same. The Board’s main task is the bigger picture set up.
Mr. Nastui poised the question, if a DPW Director is hired, whom does that person report to.
Mr. Advanti reiterated it should be the Town Administrator for continuity.
Mr. Markel suggested the pattern of management and policy making responsibility should be the same as in any other Department by reporting the day to day to the Town Administrator. Ultimately there are two other entities the Town Administrator reports to the policy making body witch is the Board of Selectmen and the Town Meeting. The Town Administrator along with the head of the Department report to the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Markel suggested the pattern of the future ought to be the pattern of right now, the Town Administrator and the DPW Director sit at the BPW meetings.
Mr. Markel went on to say that in 31 months there’ll be a transition from this Board to the Selectmen, so within that time keep the Selectmen well informed, briefed and apprised.
Mr. Melanson went over the reporting mechanism as discussed. DPW Director reports to Town Administrator with the day to day, as does every other major Department within the Town. The Director and Town Administrator would co-ordinate with the BPW any higher level significant issues. The Board of Public Works would focuses on structure, policies and procedures.
Mr. Advanti discussed the need for full time Town manages dealing with a full time professional manager on a day to day basis. The only full time professional manager at the top is the Town Administrator, whom has to deal with the complexities of other Boards.
Mr. Markel discussed the gathering of Departmental information for FY 06 Budget. Mr. Vito informed Mr. Markel Highway was no where near ready and information from the Water Department was needed.
Mr. Hall explained there are contracts that need to be let and Mr. Markel is the Chief Procurement Officer. There are also By-Law amendments needing drafting.
Mr. Advanti discussed the need of Mr. Markel working with Mr. Hathaway working together with the BPW putting together the budget.
Mr. Nasuti pointed out the Town has no licensed water operator on board as required by DEP Regulations. The BPW trying to determine would it be best to hire a Water Superintendent or a licensed operator and take a little longer time to appoint a DPW Director.
Ms. Putt commented on the lack of communication and confusion by both the BPW and the Highway Department. Ms. Putt sees an immediate need to hire a Water Superintendent to comply with DEP requirements, but a DPW Director also needs to be hired. Ms. Putt asked the Board of Public Works be told where it’s at, where it’s going and feels the Town Administrator should be included in the loop.
Mr. Lehan reiterated the need to delegate the day- to- day operations to Mr. Markel to give the Board relief from that process.
Ms. Robbins discussed the issue of union vs. non-union at the Highway and Water Departments. Mr. Lehan stated the Water Department employees are not automatically in the union. Mr. Markel interjected that this is the type of policy issues the Board of Public Works needs to address. Mr. Melanson discussed the possible need of Water Department employees being unionized otherwise Highway and Water Department employees could not help each other.
Mr. McFeeley discussed his thoughts on what to prioritize. The first thing is to fill the positions of Water Superintendent and DPW Director. Mr. McFeeley disagreed with Mr. Hall’s on the By-Law issue and felt the Board has 3 years to get one in place. Mr. McFeely reiterated the immediate need to get budget details worked out, structures in place then you codify it with a By-Law. Mr. McFeeley went on to say he didn’t see the need for a joint budget. The Board has three years to bring them together.
Mr. Lehan feels there may be some budgets impacts come this Fiscal Year based on any organizational decisions the Board makes. Mr. McFeeley concurred recommending a Water budget, Highway budget and a small DPW budget taking care of transitional items.
Mr. Advanti suggested the Board of Public Works prepare a list of items and forward to Mr. Markel. Mr. Markel could sort, guide and recommend joint meeting of both Boards to resolve issues.
Mr. Markel urged to the Board to hire a Director or interim Director to assist the Town Administrator in running the day-to-day. When the Board had their meetings the Director and Town Administrator would attend. The Town Administrator would then keep the channel open to the Board of Selectmen.
The Board of Public Works members stressed their concern with hiring a Water Superintendent to satisfy DEP requirements.
Mr. Markel discussed the lack of someone to work with on the Water budget.
Mr. McFeeley suggested Ms. Putt and Ms. Robbins continue to assist as they did before the Water Commissioners were dissolved.
Mr. Advanti asked, for clarity, the Board of Public Works summarize the items discussed at tonights meeting. Mr. Advanti asked Mr. Melanson should a Director be hired with whom does this person report to. Mr. Melanson explained, day-to-day the Town Administrator, overseen by the Board of Public Works for 3 years then the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Melanson went on to say the Board would deal with the big picture and day-to-day by Town Administrator.
Ms. Putt commented that fundamentally the BPW has a better idea of direction.
Mr. Advanti suggested the two Boards meet on a regular basis. Mr. Melanson recommended informal communication, the liaison rolls and as the need arises regarding a fundamental issue that needs to be jointly addressed.
Ms.Putt asked Mr. Markel if it was his intension to attend the BPW meetings. Mr. Markel thought his attendance would be dictated by Agenda items and discussions. Mr. Markel indicated he will contact Mr. Vito and Ms. Brooks to work on the budgets.
Mr. McFeeley addressed, along with Mr. Hall, the continued statutory responsibility of the Board of Selectmen, e.g., Street Opening Permits. The Board of Selectmen are still the Superintendent of Streets. Mr. Melanson stated one of the first policies invoked will be that both the Water and Highway Superintendents are not to sign off Street Opening Permit until the BPW concurs.
Mr. Markel asked the Board to also consider Chapter 90 allocation and determine how the money is spent for road improvements. This has been approved by the Board of Selectmen in the past and the Selectmen are also involved in the allocation of the money. Mr. McFeeley stated this is a 10 year allocation which can be jointly run.
Mr. McFeeley asked Mr. Melanson to keep him in the loop of communication.
Mr. John Hamilton, 22 Massachusetts Avenue, addressed the Board regarding his easements to the contractor, Intoccia, for the installation of electric, water, phone and cable. Mr. Hamilton cited electrical hazards and after talking with his lawyer is going to take back the easements. Ms. Putt asked Mr. Hamilton if there was still a bond out and Mr. Hamilton responded the contractor is looking for a bond reduction. Mr. Hamilton informed the Board there are 5 streets unaccepted in the subdivision, numerous mistakes and probably not enough money in the left in the bond to make repairs. Mr. Hall, Town Counsel, interjected the Planning Board is well aware of the issues and bond balance. Mr. Hall also stated in addition to the bond money there are also 10 or 15 lots still under covenant. Mr. Nasuti asked why
building permits being issued and Mr. Hall explained any lot released under the covenant is entitled to building permits, any lot still under the covenant will not be issued permits. Mr. Hall is working with the Planning Board regarding this issue.
Mr. Vito informed the Board that the Water Department lowered 160 feet of water main on Mass. Ave., under the supervision of Dufresne-Henry, which was at 3 feet. Mr. Hamilton had brought this to Mr. Vito’s attention at a Planning Board Meeting. The water main was lowered in the street to the property line at the curb stop. Mr. Vito indicated he will be attending the Planning Board Meeting to make sure the bond is not released. Further evaluation on depths are being investigated by Mr. Russell Tierney and coordinated through Edwards and Kelcey. Mr. Vito also informed the Board he’s meeting with NSTAR on Friday because the electric is 6 inches below the sidewalks.
Mr. Vito discussed the Street Opening Permit at 45 Everett Street, which the Board had previously denied. Mr. Vito has been assured by the Gas Company the service can be installed without cutting the pavement. Mr. Vito suggested the Board sign the permit with conditions. Ms. Putt suggested Mr. Vito have it re-written with conditions and the Board members could stop then sign. Mr. Vito explained the gas company now has perpetual care on fixing roads. Mr. Nasuti made a motion based on the Highway Superintendent’s review the Board approve the permit. Ms. Robbins second. Ms. Putt requests an amended application which takes the words 3 x 5 cut out. Mr. Melanson seconded Ms. Putts request. Mr. Vito stated the application could have conditions. Mr. Melanson stated the two conditions
would be including perpetual care of the road and the road not be cut. Vote in favor unanimous.
Mr. Vito discussed Phase II of the GIS mapping for water. Mr. Vito indicated $15,000 was set aside for the water portion to be included. Ms. Robbins stated the funds were committed but would like to see a demo. Mr. Tierney’s firm had proposed to possibly save some money and incorporate the mapping while they turned the gates. Mr. Vito explained this is not going to happen and the GIS is still $15, 000 and Mr. Tierney separately will be gate turning.
Ms. Putt mentioned some brown water issues recently. Ms. Robbins informed the Board this was due to the Fire Department conducting some training and opening up a hydrant. Mr. Melanson stated he had contacted the Fire Chief whom was going to post an apology. In the future the Water Department will be notified a week ahead giving ample time to post and advise the public of potential brown water.
The Board discussed the status of posting the Water Superintendent, Water Maintenance Operator and Director of Public Works positions. The Board instructed Ms. Brooks to post and then advertise all three positions.
Mr. Hathaway inquired about the garage that the Water Department stores their trucks. Ms. Putt stated in the 1970’s the Selectmen turned the garage over to the Water Department.
Mr. Hathaway discussed unpaid water bills for FY 04 and placing them as a lien. Ms. Putt made a motion to accept lien language on the water bills. Mr. Nasuti second. Vote in favor unanimous. Ms. Putt made a motion to lien the unpaid FY 04 water bills. Mr. Melanson second. Vote in favor unanimous.
Mr. Melanson made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Robbins second. Vote in favor unanimous.
Adjourned at 8:40 pm.
| 
