Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout03.02.22 FinCom Packet Town of Brewster Finance Committee 2198 Main St., Brewster, MA 02631 fincommeeting@brewster-ma.gov (508) 896-3701 MEETING AGENDA Remote Participation Only March 2, 2022 at 6:00 PM This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021,. No in-person meeting attendance will be permitted. If the Town is unable to live broadcast this meeting, a record of the proceedings will be provided on the Town website as soon as possible. The meeting may be viewed by: Live broadcast (Brewster Government TV Channel 18), Livestream (livestream.brewster- ma.gov), or Video recording (tv.brewster-ma.gov). Meetings may be joined by: 1. Phone: Call (929) 436-2866 or (301) 715-8592. Webinar ID: 862 2956 9696 Passcode: 565167 To request to speak: Press *9 and wait to be recognized. 2. Zoom Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86229569696?pwd=MUhJNGpoU3VocTZ0cTU0VGpYcWdVQT09 Passcode: 565167 To request to speak: Tap Zoom “Raise Hand” button or type “Chat” comment with your name and address, then wait to be recognized. Finance Committee Harvey (Pete) Dahl Chair Frank Bridges Vice Chair William Meehan Clerk Andrew Evans William Henchy Alex Hopper Honey Pivirotto Robert Tobias Robert Young Town Administrator Peter Lombardi Finance Director Mimi Bernardo 1. Call to Order 2. Declaration of a Quorum 3. Meeting Participation Statement 4. Recording Statement 5. Public Announcements and Comment: Members of the public may address the Finance Committee on matters not on the meeting’s agenda for a maximum 3-5 minutes at the Chair’s discretion. Under the Open Meeting Law, the Finance Committee is unable to reply but may add items presented to a future agenda. 6. Town Administrator/Finance Director Report 7. Town Meeting Warrant Articles – Discussion and Vote a. Citizen’s Petition - Punkhorn Hunting Ban b. Citizen’s Petition - Punkhorn Hunting Restrictions c. STM Article 2 – Transition Golf Depertment to Enterprise Fund d. ATM Article 5 – Nauset Regional Assessment Formula e. ATM Article 8 – Creation of New Golf Stabilization Fund f. ATM Article 12 – Bond Premium Appropriation g. ATM Article 13 – Special Revenue Fund: Cable Franchise Fee h. ATM Article 14 – Acceptance of Grants and Gifts i. ATM Article 15 – Repair & Resurface of Town roads – Chaprer 90 Funds 8. Update on Water Quality Project Funding Options and Continued Brewster Participation in Cape Cod and Island Water Protection Fund 9. Nauset Regional Public Schools Budget – Discussion and Strategic Direction 10. Budget Calendar – Update 11. Liaison Reports 12. Review and Approval of Minutes 13. Request for agenda items for future meetings. 14. Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair 15. Next Finance Committee Meeting - March 9, 2022 16. Adjournment Date Posted: Date Revised: Received by Town Clerk: 2/28/22 Town of Brewster SPECIAL & ANNUAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT for May 2, 2022 at 6:00 PM STONY BROOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 384 UNDERPASS ROAD Please bring this copy of the warrant to Town Meeting Large print copies of the warrant are available at the Brewster Town Offices TOWN OF BREWSTER SPECIAL & ANNUAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT May 2, 2022 TABLE OF CONTENTS A INDEX 2 B INFORMATION & MODERATOR’S STATEMENT FOR VOTERS 4 C CONSENT CALENDAR – ROUTINE ARTICLES FOR APPROVAL D FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT E TAX RATE INFORMATION F CAPITAL PROJECTS REPORT G HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES REPORT H 2022 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES ARTICLE DESCRIPTION SPONSOR PAGE 1 Outstanding Obligations Select Board 2 Budgetary Transfers Select Board 3 Acceptance of MGL Chapter 44 Section 53F½ - Transition Golf Department to Enterprise Fund effective FY23 Select Board 4 Other Business Select Board H 2022 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING WARRANT ARTICLES 1 Cape Cod Regional Technical High School Operating Budget Cape Cod Technical School Committee 2 Elementary Schools Operating Budget Elementary School Committee 3 Creation of New Brewster Elementary Schools Special Education Stabilization Fund Elementary School Committee 4 Nauset Regional Schools Operating Budget Nauset Regional School Committee 5 Assessment Formula for Nauset Regional Schools Nauset Regional School Committee 6 Town Operating Budget Select Board 7 Water Enterprise Fund Select Board 8 Creation of New Golf Capital Stabilization Fund Select Board 9 Golf Enterprise Fund Budget Select Board 10 Community Preservation Act Funding Community Preservation Committee 11 Capital and Special Projects Expenditures Select Board 12 Bond Premium Reallocation Select Board 13 Special Revenue Fund: Cable Franchise Fee Select Board 14 Acceptance of Grants and Gifts Select Board 15 Repair & Resurface Town Roads/Chapter 90 Funds Select Board 16 Town Code Amendment to Community Preservation Committee bylaw (§ 17) Select Board 17 Cape Cod & Islands Water Protection Fund (CCIWPF) Opt Out (MGL Ch 29C Sec 3C) Select Board 18 Acceptance of MGL Ch 64G Sec 3D (Local Option) – New 3% Community Impact Fee from Short-term Rental Revenues for Water Quality, Affordable Housing, and Town Infrastructure Select Board 19 Special Act to Establish Brewster-Specific CCIWPF Equivalent to Fund Local Water Quality Initiatives Select Board 20 Utility Easement – 361 Slough Road Select Board 21 Lease of Town Property/Antenna Select Board 22 Citizens Petition/Punkhorn Hunting Ban Citizens Group 23 Citizens Petition/Punkhorn Hunting Restrictions Citizens Group 24 Other Business Select Board J TOWN MODERATOR’S RULES K GLOSSARY OF FINANCIAL TERMS CONSENT CALENDAR ROUNTINE ARTICLES FOR APPROVAL To expedite Town Meeting and save valuable time for discussion of key issues, the 1994 Fall Yearly Town Meeting created the "Consent Calendar" to speed passage of articles that appear to raise no controversy. The purpose of the Consent Calendar is to allow the motions under these articles to be acted upon as one unit and to be passed by a unanimous vote without debate. THIS CONSENT CALENDAR WILL BE TAKEN UP AS THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS AT THE ANNUAL TOWN MEETING ON MAY 2, 2022. If you have any questions about these articles, motions or the procedure please call the Town Administrator’s office at 508-896-3701 X1100 before Town Meeting. At the call of the Consent Calendar, the Moderator will call out the numbers of the articles, one by one. If any voter has doubt about passing any motion or wishes an explanation of any subject on the Consent Calendar, THE VOTER SHOULD STAND AND SAY THE WORD "HOLD" IN A LOUD, CLEAR, VOICE WHEN THE NUMBER IS CALLED. The Moderator will then inquire as to whether the request to hold is for a question or for debate. If the purpose of the request was merely to ask a question, an attempt to obtain a satisfactory answer will be made, and if that occurs, the article will remain on the Consent Calendar absent a further request to hold. If the purpose of the request was to hold the article for debate, the article will be removed from the Consent Calendar and restored to its original place in the warrant, to be brought up, and debated and voted on in the usual manner. No voter should hesitate to exercise the right to remove matters from the Consent Calendar. It is the view of the voters as to the need for debate that is significant, not that of the town officials who put together the Consent Calendar. However, it is hoped that voters will remove articles from the Consent Calendar only in cases of genuine concern. After calling of the individual items in the Consent Calendar, the Moderator will ask that all items remaining be passed as a unit by a unanimous vote. Please review the list of articles proposed for the Consent Calendar which follows. Complete reports can be found under each article printed in this warrant. PROPOSED CONSENT CALENDAR FOR ROUTINE WARRANT ARTICLES No. 4 Assessment Formula for Nauset Public Schools No. 12 Special Revenue Fund/Cable Franchise Fee No. 14 Acceptance of Grants and Gifts No. 15 Repair and Resurface Town Roads/Chapter 90 Funds TOWN OF BREWSTER SPECIAL TOWN MEETING MAY 2, 2022 Barnstable, ss To: Roland W. Bassett, Jr. Constable of the Town of Brewster Greetings: In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, you are hereby directed to notify and inform the Town of Brewster inhabitants qualified to vote in Town affairs to meet in the Cafetorium at the Stony Brook Elementary School, 384 Underpass Road, on Monday, May 2, 2022, next, at 6:00 p.m. o’clock in the evening, then and there to act upon the following articles: OUTSTANDING OBLIGATIONS ARTICLE NO. 1: To see what sums the Town will vote to appropriate from available funds for the payment of unpaid obligations from previous fiscal years, including any bills now on overdraft: Vendor Amount a. Custom Drug Testing $165.00 b. Titleist $729.26 c. Jet Professional Group Total $ Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Nine-tenths Vote Required) COMMENT This article will authorize the payment of outstanding bills from a previous fiscal year. According to Massachusetts General Laws, a Town cannot pay a bill from a previous fiscal year with the current year’s appropriation. Therefore, Town Meeting authorization is required. a. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 b. 0 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 c. 0 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 BUDGETARY TRANSFERS ARTICLE NO. 2: To see what sums the Town will vote to transfer into various line items of the Fiscal Year 2022 General Fund operating budget from other line items of said budget and from other available funds: FROM TO AMOUNT a b c Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article would authorize the transfer of surplus funds from certain departments’ budgets and/or accounts and Free Cash for Fiscal Year 2022 to other accounts which are experiencing unanticipated shortfalls and/or require additional funding for new programs and/or initiatives. The following is a brief review of these requests: a. This sum is required to Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 b. This sum is required to Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 c. This sum is required to Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 GOLF DEPARTMENT ENTERPRISE FUND ARTICLE NO. 3: To see if the Town will vote to accept the provision of G.L. Ch. 44 Section 53F½ in order to establish a Golf Department Enterprise Fund for fiscal year commencing on July 1, 2022, and to transfer any funds remaining in the Water Department Reserve Fund as of June 30, 2022, or to take any other action relative thereto. Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT While Brewster Golf Department revenues and expenses have always been accounted for separate from the General Fund, acceptance of this local option formally establishes the Golf Department as an enterprise fund. Enterprise fund accounting provides more flexibility and transparency than the current enabling statute for our Golf Department. It clearly identifies the total cost of providing this service and helps determine if the rates charged are sufficient to cover the cost, providing useful management information and data tracking for more informative decision making. The National Golf Foundation recently completed a comprehensive analysis of operations, finances, and capital needs for the Captain’s Golf course. The Golf Commission and Town staff have further refined projections based on their findings and recommendations. Enterprise fund accounting allows payments for indirect costs to flow from the enterprise to the General Fund to reimburse the Town for the associated costs of Town employees working on enterprise activities. Also, surpluses remain in the fund and may be used to pay operating, capital, or debt service costs associated with the operation. Additionally, investment income earned by the particular enterprise fund is retained within the fund to finance anticipated projects. The MA Department of Revenue’s Division of Local Services recommended making this change in their 2019 Financial Management Review. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 OTHER BUSINESS ARTICLE NO. 4 To act upon any other business that may legally come before this meeting; or to take any other action related thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) You are hereby directed to serve this Warrant with your doings thereon to the Town Clerk at the time and place of said meeting as aforesaid. Given under our hand and Seal of the Town of Brewster affixed this __th day of April 2022. ___________________________________ Cynthia A. Bingham, Chair ___________________________________ David C. Whitney, Vice-Chair ___________________________________ Edward B. Chatelain, Clerk ___________________________________ Mary W. Chaffee ___________________________________ Kari Sue Hoffmann I, Roland W. Bassett Jr, duly qualified Constable for the Town of Brewster, hereby certify that I served the Warrant for the Special Town Meeting of May 2, 2022 by posting attested copies thereof, in the following locations in the Town on the xx day of April, 2022. Brewster Town Offices Café Alfresco Brewster Ladies Library Brewster Pizza House The Brewster General Store Millstone Liquors U. S. Post Office _________________________________ Roland W. Bassett, Jr. Constable TOWN OF BREWSTER ANNUAL TOWN MEETING MAY 2, 2022 Barnstable, ss To: Roland W. Bassett, Jr. Constable of the Town of Brewster Greetings: In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, you are hereby directed to notify and inform the Town of Brewster inhabitants qualified to vote in Town affairs to meet in the Cafetorium at the Stony Brook Elementary School, 384 Underpass Road, on Monday, May 2, 2022, next, at 6:00 p.m. o’clock in the evening, then and there to act upon the following articles: CAPE COD REGIONAL TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL OPERATING BUDGET ARTICLE NO. 1: To see what sums the Town will vote to raise and appropriate and/or transfer from available funds to defray Cape Cod Regional Technical High School charges and expenses for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, as follows; DEPARTMENT EXPENDED FY2021 APPROPRIATED FY2022 REQUESTED FY2023 CAPE COD TECH ASSESSMENT DEBT ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT or to take any other action relative thereto. (Cape Cod Technical School Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article will provide funding for the Fiscal Year 2023 operating budget for the Cape Cod Regional Technical High School District. This district consists of the Towns of Barnstable, Brewster, Chatham, Dennis, Eastham, Harwich, Mashpee, Orleans, Provincetown, Truro, Wellfleet and Yarmouth. The overall district-wide budget has increased by x.xx% over Fiscal Year 2022. Brewster’s actual share of the assessment has increased/decreased by a sum of $xxx,xxx or xx.xx% over Fiscal Year 2022. District wide enrollment has increased/decreased from xxx students to xxx students; with Brewster’s enrollment increasing/decreasing from xx to xx students for this same period. The Debt Assessment line represents Brewster’s third year payment for our share of the school building project for the new Cape Cod Regional Technical High School. This project was approved by the voters at the October 24, 2017 Special Election. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS OPERATING BUDGET ARTICLE NO. 2: To see what sums the Town will vote to raise and appropriate and/or transfer from available funds to defray the Elementary Schools’ charges and expenses, for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, as follows; DEPARTMENT EXPENDED FY2021 APPROPRIATED FY2022 REQUESTED FY2023 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BUDGET SCHOOL FRINGE BENEFITS TOTAL ASSESSMENT: or to take any other action relative thereto. (Elementary School Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article will provide funding for the Fiscal Year 2023 operational budget for the Stony Brook and Eddy Elementary Schools. The Fiscal Year 2023 budget request for the Elementary Schools stands at $x,xxx,xxx. These operational budgets have increased by the total sum of $xxx,xxx or x.x%, over Fiscal Year 2022. The Town’s total elementary school assessment is increasing by x.x% when the schools proportionate shares of fringe benefits expenses is applied. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 SPECIAL EDUCATION STABILIZATION FUND ARTICLE NO. 3: This article will provide for the creation of a new Brewster Elementary Schools Special Education Stabilization Fund. (Elementary School Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 NAUSET REGIONAL SCHOOLS OPERATING BUDGET ARTICLE NO. 4: To see what sums the Town will vote to raise and appropriate and/or transfer from available funds to defray the Nauset Regional School District charges and expenses for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 2023, as follows; DEPARTMENT EXPENDED FY2021 APPROPRIATED FY2022 REQUESTED FY2023 NAUSET ASSESSMENT NAUSET DEBT ASSESSMENT TOTAL ASSESSMENT: or to take any other action relative thereto. (Nauset Regional School Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article provides funding for the Fiscal Year 2023 operational budget for the Nauset Regional School District. The overall operating budget for the Nauset Regional Schools stands at $xx,xxx,xxx which represents an increase of x.x% over the prior year. Brewster’s share of the Nauset Schools operational budget is $xx,xxx,xxx. Brewster’s proportionate share of enrollment has increased/decreased from xxx% in Fiscal Year 2022 to xx.xx% in Fiscal Year 2023. The Town’s share of the operational budget has increase x.xx% over Fiscal Year 2022, due to the increase in Brewster’s share of the enrollment. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 ASSESSMENT FORMULA FOR NAUSET REGIONAL SCHOOLS ARTICLE NO. 5: To see if the Town will vote, pursuant to the provisions of the fourth paragraph of G.L. c.71, §16B, to reallocate the sum of the member towns’ contributions to the Nauset Regional School District in Fiscal Year 2024 in accordance with the Regional Agreement rather than the Education Reform Formula, so-called, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Nauset Regional School Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article will apportion the Nauset Regional School District’s assessment to the four member towns for the upcoming fiscal year based on their proportionate annual student enrollment within the school district. This specific methodology is provided for within the inter-municipal agreement, approved by the four towns establishing the Nauset Regional School District. This allocation formula has been applied in each of the last twenty-three years by Town Meeting vote. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 TOWN OPERATING BUDGET ARTICLE NO. 6: To see what sums the Town will vote to raise and appropriate, transfer from available funds, or borrow pursuant to any applicable statute, for the purposes of supporting the offices, departments, boards and commissions of the Town of Brewster for Fiscal Year 2023, including authorization for lease purchases of up to five years, as follows; EXPENDED APPROPRIATED REQUESTED DEPARTMENT FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 GENERAL GOVERNMENT Finance Committee Assessors Accounting Treasurer/ Collector Information Technology Legal Moderator Planning Select Board / Town Administration Town Clerk Public Buildings SUBTOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT PUBLIC SAFETY Building Department Fire Department Natural Resources Police Department Sealer of Weights & Measures SUBTOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY EXPENDED APPROPRIATED REQUESTED DEPARTMENT FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 PUBLIC WORKS Public Works Snow & Ice Removal Street Lights SUBTOTAL PUBLIC WORKS HUMAN SERVICES Council on Aging Board of Health Veteran’s Services Public Assistance SUBTOTAL HUMAN SERVICES CULTURE & RECREATION Brewster Ladies Library Recreation Memorial & Veterans Day SUBTOTAL CULTURE & RECREATION DEBT SERVICE Principal & Interest SUBTOTAL DEBT SERVICE INSURANCE, UTILITIES & FRINGE BENEFITS General Insurance Utilities Fringe Benefits Including OPEB SUBTOTAL INSURANCE & FRINGE BENEFITS EXPENDED APPROPRIATED REQUESTED DEPARTMENT FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 OTHER OPERATING EXPENSE & ASSESSMENTS Assessments Alewives General Stabilization Fund Local Service Funding SUBTOTAL OTHER OEPRATING EXPENSE & ASSESSMENTS GRAND TOTAL OF GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGETS Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT This article will provide funding for the Fiscal Year 2023 operational budget for the Town boards, committees, and departments. The Town’s operational budget, as presented in this article, exclusive of the transfer to the general stabilization fund, has increased x.xx%  Public Assistance: This section is inclusive of funding for the Health & Human Service organizations and fuel assistance.  Assessments: This section is inclusive of funding for Pleasant Bay Alliance, Greenhead Fly and the Historic District.  Local Services Funding: This section is inclusive of Chamber of Commerce, Town Band, Cultural Council, Skipping Program and Millsites. Water Department and Golf Department related operating expenditures are now shown in their own articles in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, Section 53F½ and Chapter 40, Section 5 respectively. Water, Golf, and Ambulance related capital requests are still contained in the Capital Appropriation Article. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 WATER DEPARTMENT ENTERPRISE FUND ARTICLE NO. 7: To see if the Town will vote, in accordance with G.L. c. 44, §53F1/2, to appropriate from Water Department receipts, transfer from available funds or otherwise fund the sum of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX DOLLARS ($x,xxx,xxx) for Fiscal Year 2023 costs associated with the operation of the Water Department including, but not limited to acquiring professional services and equipment, personnel and maintaining facilities and operations, including authorization for lease purchases of up to five years; all expenditures to be made by the Water Department, subject to the approval of the Town Administrator, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, Section 53F1/2, receipts from Water Department related activities are used to directly offset Water Department related expenditures including capital and infrastructure costs. Voting a spending amount within the Water Department Enterprise Fund allows receipts and related expenditures to be recorded in one fund. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 GOLF CAPITAL STABILIZATION FUND ARTICLE NO. 8: To see if the Town will vote to accept the provisions of G.L. c. 40, §5B for the purpose of establishing a Golf Course Capital Improvement and Maintenance Stabilization Fund; and to see if the Town will raise and appropriate and/or transfer from available funds a sum of money for said stabilization fund, or take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT With several major capital projects anticipated in the next few years at the Captains, this new capital stabilization fund would allow the Town to direct a portion of anticipated Golf revenues to help pay for some of these future projects without issuing debt. For FY23, a $400,000 appropriation is included in the proposed FY23 budget that would transfer those funds to this new account. Funds in the new Golf Capital Stabilization Fund will require a 2/3 vote by Town Meeting to appropriate. The Town currently plans to consistently make significant contributions to this new fund in the next few years to help mitigate the cost impacts of those capital projects to avoid the need of major fee increases in future years. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND ARTICLE NO. 9: To see if the Town will vote to appropriate from the Golf Fund, in accordance with G.L. c.40, §5F, the sum of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ($x,xxx,xxx) for the purpose of offsetting costs for Fiscal Year 2023 associated with golf department related expenses including, but not limited to acquiring professional services and equipment, personnel and maintaining facilities and operations, including authorization for lease purchases of up to five years; all expenditures to be made by the Golf Department, subject to the approval of the Town Administrator, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40, Section 5F, receipts from Golf Department related activities are used to directly offset Golf Department related expenditures. Voting a spending amount for the Golf Departments allows all receipts and related expenditures to be recorded in one fund. The FY23 Golf Budget reflects up-to-date analysis of the impact of the pandemic on course operations and estimated revenues, and includes modest funding for investment in necessary capital projects. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION ACT FUNDING ARTICLE NO.10 : To see if the Town will vote to act on the report of the Community Preservation Committee on the Fiscal Year 2023 Community Preservation Budget and to appropriate or reserve for later appropriation monies from the Community Preservation Fund annual revenues or available funds for the administrative and operating expenses of the Community Preservation Committee, the undertaking of Community Preservation Projects and all other necessary and proper expenses for the year, with each item considered a separate appropriation to be spent by the Community Preservation Committee, all as set forth below: Estimated revenues FY23 a. Estimated FY23 tax surcharge $1,144,558 b. Estimated FY23 state contribution (25%) $ 286,140 c. FY23 Estimated Total: $1,430,698* *Note: these numbers were agreed upon by Mimi and CPC Officers in a November meeting. FY23 Appropriations and Allocations d. Historic Preservation Reserve appropriation (10%) $143,070 e. Community Housing Reserve appropriation (10%) $143,070 f. Open Space Reserve appropriation (50%) $715,349 g. Budgeted Reserve* (30%) $429,209 h. Total $1,430,698 * 5% of FY23 Estimated Total ($71,535) is appropriated for Administrative Expense leaving a net total of $357,674 in Budgeted Reserve. Purpose Item Funding Source(s) Amount 1 Historic Preservation a. Brewster Historical Society Digitization of Ellen St. Sure Collection Transfer $22,617 from Historic Preservation Fund balance $22,617 Sub-total $22,617 2 Community Housing a. Town of Brewster Town Administration- Housing Coordinator Payroll and operating costs for Part Time Housing Coordinator position to assist public with affordable housing program Transfer $66,900 from Community Housing Fund balance $66,900 b. Community Development Partnership Lower Cape Housing Institute (2 year funding) Transfer $15,000 from TBD $15,000 c. Pennrose LLC Affordable housing at former Cape Cod Five Operations Center in Orleans Transfer $100,000 Community Housing Fund Balance $100,000 Sub-total $181,900 3 Open Space a. Community Preservation Bonded Debt Service Payment of debt principal and interest for the BBJ Property, and Bates Property bonds Transfer $196,658 from Open Space fund balance $196,658 Sub-total $196,658 4 Budgeted Reserve a. Administration Expense Administration and operating expenses for Community Preservation Committee Fiscal Year 2023 CPA estimated annual revenues $71,535 Sub-total $71,535 Grand Total $xxxxxxxx For Fiscal Year 2023 Community Preservation purposes, each item is considered a separate appropriation to be spent by the Community Preservation Committee; provided however, that the above expenditures may be conditional on the grant or acceptance of appropriate historic preservation restrictions for historic resources, open space restrictions for open space reserves, and housing restrictions for community housing, running in favor of an entity authorized by the Commonwealth to hold such restrictions for such expenditures, meeting the requirements of G.L. c.184 and G.L. c.44B, Section 12, and to authorize the Board of Selectmen to convey or accept such restrictions; And further, any revenues received in excess of the estimated receipts are transferred to their respective reserve fund balance(s) for future appropriation using the allocation formula of 50% Open Space, 10% Housing, 10% Historical and 30% for Budgeted Reserve for CPA. Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Community Preservation Committee) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT In May of 2005, Brewster voters approved a ballot question which allowed for the adoption of the modified Community Preservation Act. The act appropriates a 3% surcharge on the town’s real estate tax revenues, which are reserved in a special fund in order to finance projects and programs for the purposes of preservation of open space, recreation, community housing, and historic preservation. Brewster is also eligible to receive up to 100% in matching funds from the State, although we anticipate a reduced reimbursement rate from the State for Fiscal Year 2023, which is projected at 15%. Brewster established, through a local bylaw, a distribution schedule for the CPA funds according to the following: 50% of the funds for open space, 10% for community housing, 10% for historic preservation, and 30% balance is available for housing, historic preservation and/or active or passive recreation projects. 1. Historic Preservation: a. Historical Society – Digitization of Ellen St. Sure collection Total Project Cost: $457,700 CPC Request: $125,000 CPC Vote: 8-0-0 Estimated balance (reserve plus FY23 estimated revenues) if items approved: $525,174 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 2. Community Housing: a. Town of Brewster- Housing Coordinator - This item will fund the part-time Housing Coordinator position. The Community Preservation Committee has supported the Housing Coordinator position since 2017. The hiring of a housing coordinator was identified as a key strategy in the Brewster Housing Production Plan. The Housing Coordinator holds hours for the public weekly, supports multiple town committees, including the Housing Trust and Housing Partnership, works with regional housing agencies and organizations in town to promote housing choice. The housing coordinator is an integral part of the Town housing efforts, outlined in both the Town Vision Plan and the Select Board strategic plan. The Housing Coordinator helps to acquire, create, preserve and support community housing. Last year, the Housing Coordinator's work hours were increased to 25 hours per week, due to the growth of housing programs and initiatives. The FY23 request is to continue the position at 25 hours per week with the CPC providing funding for the salary and the Town providing funding for all benefits of the position. Our housing program continues to be a partnership of many town entities. Total Project Cost: $85,874 CPC Request: $51,096 CPC Vote: 8-0-0 b. Community Development Partnership – Lower Cape Housing Institute Total Project Cost: $1,018,975 CPC Request: $52,500 CPC Vote: 8-0-0 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 c. Pennrose/Cape Cod Five Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 3. Open Space: a. Community Preservation Bonded Debt Service- This item pays for the $196,658 in FY 2023 principal and interest on 3 CPA (BBJ 1 and 2 and Bates) open space acquisitions that were financed via long term bonding. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 4. Reserves for Community Preservation: a. Habitat for Humanity – Red Top Road Community Housing - Habitat for Humanity proposes to build 2 high quality three-bedroom affordable homes at 26 Red Top Road on land donated by a private Brewster resident. Habitat for Humanity Cape Cod provides homeownership opportunities for families at income levels not served by other affordability programs. Habitat’s home pricing model, along with financing assistance for qualified buyers, allows a household earning 40% of area median income, as adjusted for family size, to afford a home. The homes will be affordable in perpetuity, and will count on Brewster’s DHCD Subsidized Housing Inventory. Habitat intends to ask DHCD for a“veteran preference” pool for the family selection for one of the two homes, and for the other home to be open to Barnstable County residents. $100,000 of the award will go toward construction costs. $5,000 will be set aside to cover legal expenses incurred by the CPC in connection with the award. Total Project Cost: $786,884 CPC Request: $105,000 CPC Vote: 8-0-0 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 b. Brewster Affordable Housing Trust Fund – Rental Assistance Program: This item would fund the Brewster Affordable Housing Trust Rental Assistance Program (B-RAP) for two additional years. Over the past years, and exacerbated with the Covid-19 pandemic, year- round rental housing has become more difficult for Brewster households to afford. The Brewster Affordable Housing Trust Rental Assistance Program (B-RAP) assists low and moderate income Brewster households to both attain and retain rental housing. Using previous CPA funding, approved at the 2018 Fall Special Town Meeting, the Housing Trust developed the B- RAP program in response to identified needs in the community and designed the emergency assistance component in coordination with eight Lower Cape Towns and local social service agencies. The program, managed by Housing Assistance Corporation (HAC), provides a monthly rental subsidy as well as case management support to assist residents in affording rentals. The emergency Covid-19 assistance component provides funds to help households impacted by Covid-19 maintain their rental housing. Prior to using B-RAP funds, HAC works with applicants to access financial assistance from federal, state, and county programs as well as private donations. This initiative keeps Brewster residents housed, supports the health of the community, and provides landlords with needed funds. Total Project Cost: $225,000 CPC Request: $150,000 CPC Vote: 6-0-0 Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 d. Administrative Expense- This item will fund the costs associated with general administrative and operating expenses, including but not limited to legal and other professional consulting services, related to carrying out the operations of the Community Preservation Committee. The Community Preservation Act allows up to 5 % of expected annual revenues for this purpose. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 CAPITAL AND SPECIAL PROJECTS EXPENDITURES ARTICLE NO. 11: To see what sums the Town will vote to raise and appropriate, transfer from available funds, or authorize the Town Treasurer to borrow under and pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, Sections 7, 7(1), or 8, or any other enabling authority, for the capital outlay expenditures listed below, including, in each case, all incidental and related costs, to be expended by the Town Administrator with the approval of the Board of Selectmen, except School expenditures to be made by the School Superintendent with the approval of the School Committee; authorize leases and lease purchase agreements for more than three but not more than five years for those items to be leased or lease purchased, and further that the Town Administrator with the approval of the Board of Selectmen or School Superintendent with the approval of the School Committee for school items, be authorized to sell, convey, trade-in or otherwise dispose of equipment being replaced, all as set forth below: Department Item Funding Source(s) / Appropriation or Transfer Amount 1 Select Board Sub-Total $ 2 Elementary School Department a. b. c. d. Sub-Total $ 3 Nauset Regional School District a. Capital Plan Projects Professional services and costs, including procuring, engineering, permitting, repair and maintenance of buildings, grounds, and equipment within the Nauset Middle School and Nauset High School Raise and appropriate $xxx,xxx Sub-Total $xxx,xxx 4 Natural Resources a. Sub-Total $ Department Item Funding Source(s) / Appropriation or Transfer Amount 5 Information Technology a. b. c. Sub-Total $ 6 Water Department a. Construction Account Costs for goods, materials and services to maintain and repair the Town’s water system Water Receipts Reserved for Appropriation $ Sub-Total $ Department Item Funding Source(s) / Appropriation or Transfer Amount 7 Department of Public Works a. Tree Work Professional Services tree work and/or removal of trees that are deemed a safety hazard by the Public Works Department General Fund Free Cash b. Road & Drainage Projects Professional services, including engineering, permitting and construction costs, for Town road maintenance and drainage projects General Fund Free Cash c. Irrigation Projects Professional services, including engineering, permitting and construction costs, for Town irrigation projects General Fund Free Cash Sub-Total $ 8 Fire Department a. Personal Protective Equipment Costs for purchase of personal protective equipment Ambulance Receipts Reserved for Appropriation $ b. c. Sub-Total $ Grand Total $ Or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT 1. SELECT BOARD 1a. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 1b. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 1c. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 1d. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 2. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DEPARTMENT 2a. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 2b. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 2c. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 2d. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 3. NAUSET REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT 4a. Capital Plan Projects – The District is seeking funding in the amount of $xxx,xxx which is an assessment for the capital equipment and facilities budget for the Nauset Schools. This program was originally approved by means of a Proposition 2 ½ Override question in May of 2005. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 4. NATURAL RESOURCES 4a. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 5. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 5a. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 5b. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 5c. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 6. WATER DEPARTMENT 6a. Construction Account – This request represents the annual appropriation for goods, materials and services to maintain and repair the water system. It also includes water meters for new services and replacement as required under State regulations. This account is part of the department’s capital plan and is provided for within the present water rate structure. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 7. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 7a. Tree Work – Brewster has a number of dead and/or dying trees along roads and among our public buildings and lands. These trees require the service of outside arborists who assist our crews in removing hazardous trees. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 7b. Road and Drainage Projects – This request provides funding for the Town’s annual road and drainage repair fund. This is an all-encompassing account used for road maintenance and to repair local drainage issues, street sweeping, catch basin cleaning, and disposal of sweepings and catch basin cleaning. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 7c. Irrigation Projects – This is also an all-encompassing account used for repair, replacement, and maintenance cost of Town irrigation systems. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 8. FIRE DEPARTMENT 8a. Personal Protective Equipment – The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) sets specific standards regarding the number of years (10) a firefighter’s fire suppression ensemble can remain in service. In order to ensure we follow these standards and provide our staff with the highest level of protection during emergency incidents, we must systematically purchase these items on an annual basis. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 8b. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 8c. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 BOND PREMIUM REALLOCATION ARTICLE NO. 12: To see if the Town will vote to transfer and appropriate $238,349 from bond sale premiums from the XXXXXXX projects, as authorized at the XX/XX/XXXX Town Meeting under article X, to the Road Bond Capital Projects Fund. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND/Cable Franchise Fee Account ARTICLE NO. 13: To see if the Town will vote to appropriate from the Cable Franchise Fee Special Revenue Fund the sum of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000), for the purpose of offsetting costs associated with providing local cable television related purposes, the sum of including, but not limited to the general public purpose of supporting and promoting public access to the Brewster cable television system; training in the use of local access equipment and facilities; access to community, municipal and educational meeting coverage; use and development of an institutional network and/or municipal information facilities; contracting with local cable programming services providers and/or any other appropriate cable related purposes, and including all incidental and related expenses, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Included within each resident’s cable bill is a line item to provide for the costs of local cable television services. These monies are retained in a special revenue account and are used to enhance local cable programming for the town’s public, education, and government channels. These funds will be used to continue these informational and educational services, and may include, but is not limited to, equipment purchases, contracted services, construction services, and labor expenses. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 ACCEPTANCE OF GRANTS AND GIFTS ARTICLE NO. 14: To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen and Elementary School Committee to apply for and accept any and all grants or gifts from Federal, State, and local governments, charitable foundations, private corporations, and individual and private entities, and to expend those funds for the purposes for which grants are authorized; and to authorize the Treasurer, in anticipation of grant proceeds to borrow amounts under and pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, Section 7 or 8, or any other enabling authority, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT In any given year, Town Boards, Committees and Departments apply for a wide variety of grant opportunities from Federal, State or private entities. Often these grants are reimbursable programs, in which the Town must borrow the funds, complete the work, provide documentation and then file for reimbursement. This annual authorization will provide the Select Board with the tools to pursue these special opportunities in a timely manner. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 REPAIR AND RESURFACE TOWN ROADS/Chapter 90 Funds ARTICLE NO. 15: To see if the Town will vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to apply for and accept State Grants from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Highway Division (Chapter 90), and to expend those funds for the purposes of state approved Chapter 90 projects, services, and purchases; and to authorize the Treasurer, in anticipation of grant proceeds to borrow amounts under and pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 44, Section 7 or 8, or any other enabling authority, or take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT The Chapter 90 Program was enacted in 1973, by the Commonwealth in order to provide municipalities with reimbursement for documented expenditures under the provisions of General Laws, Chapter 90 on approved road projects. The funding, provided from Transportation Bond Issues, authorizes such improvement projects for highway construction, preservation and improvement projects that create or extend the life of transportation facilities. These funds must be used in compliance with all applicable statutes and regulations, as applicable for maintaining, repairing, improving and constructing Town ways which qualify under the State Aid Highway guidelines adopted by the Massachusetts Public Works Commission (MPWC). Funds must be allocated to roadway projects, such as resurfacing and related work and other work incidental to the above such as preliminary engineering, right-of- way acquisition, shoulders, side road approaches, landscaping and tree planting, roadside drainage, structures, sidewalks, traffic control and service facilities, street lighting, and for such other purposes as the MPWC may specifically authorize. The Town is required to appropriate these monies as an available fund, and is then reimbursed by the State upon the completion of the project and payment to the vendor. The anticipated amount of Chapter 90 funds from the State for FY23 is at least $310,000, consistent with prior year actuals. Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 TOWN CODE AMENDMENT TO COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE BYLAW ARTICLE NO. 16: (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 CAPE COD & ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND (CCIWPF) OPT OUT ARTICLE NO. 17: (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 ACCEPTANCE OF MGL CH 64G SEC 3D (LOCAL OPTION) ARTICLE NO. 18: (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 SPECIAL ACT TO ESTABLISH BREWSTER-SPECIFIC CCIWPF EQUIVALENT TO FUND LOCAL WATER QUALITY INITIATIVES ARTICLE NO. 19: (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 UTILITY EASEMENT - 361 SLOUGH ROAD ARTICLE NO. 20: (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 LEASE OF TOWN PROPERTY/Antenna ARTICLE NO. 21: To see if the Town will vote to transfer from the Board of Water Commissioners for water department purposes to the Board of Water Commissioners for such purposes and also to the Board of Selectmen for the purpose of leasing a portion or portions of the Town-owned property located at 0 Yankee Drive, and to authorize the Town Administrator, acting under the direction of the Board of Selectmen, to lease said portions, including space on the water tank located thereon and/or land at the base of or near said water tank, for wireless communications purposes, including, without limitation, for the construction, installation, maintenance and replacement of communications antennas, towers, cabinets, cables, and other appurtenances, and to grant such non-exclusive access and/or utility easements on portions of said property as may be necessary or convenient to serve the communications equipment thereon, said leases to be for periods not exceeding twenty (20) years and on such other terms and conditions as the Town Administrator and Board of Selectmen deem to be in the best interests of the Town, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 CITIZENS PETITION/Punkhorn Hunting Ban ARTICLE NO.22 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town’s General Bylaw by Adding a new Chapter 98 – Hunting in the Punkhorn Parklands as follows: §98-1 No person shall discharge any gun, including paint ball guns, fowling piece, pistol, or firearm or release an arrow from a bow or hunt or trap or poison or set fire to any material known as fireworks, or other combustible matter, on any and all Town-owned parcels in southwest Brewster commonly referred to as the Punkhorn Parklands; provided, however, this section shall not apply to any person abating nuisance or in the exercise of duty required by law, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Citizen's Petition) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT The parcels of land commonly referred to as the Punkhorn Parklands constitute a major conservation area, purchased by the Town to protect it from development and to preserve its varied environment. Public use of the Punkhorn has increased significantly over the years, with an even greater increase occurring during the past couple of years of social distancing necessitated by the COVID pandemic. Every year more and more hikers, dog walkers, cyclists, horseback riders, bird watchers, and nature lovers make use of the Punkhorn trails and lands, both residents and visitors alike. At the May 1989 Annual Election, Brewster voters passed a non-binding public advisory to express the opinion that all hunting and use of firearms, bows and arrows, air guns and pellet guns should be prohibited in the Town-owned Punkhorn Parkland. At the May 15, 2021 Special & Annual Town Meeting, voters passed what we thought was a by-law banning hunting in the Punkhorn. The Attorney General's Office approved it, but Town Counsel ruled that the language did not conform to the standards for a by-law, so the petition was "merely advisory." This time, Town Counsel supplied the appropriate language to make this a binding by-law. We once again urge you to vote to make this ban official to protect the safety of all who use the Punkhorn Parklands. Select Board: Yes 3, No 2, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 CITIZENS PETITION/Punkhorn Hunting Restrictions ARTICLE NO.23 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town’s General Bylaw by Adding a new Chapter 98 – Hunting in the Punkhorn Parklands as follows: §98-1 No person shall discharge any gun, including paint ball guns, fowling piece, pistol, or firearm or release an arrow from a bow or hunt or trap or poison or set fire to any material known as fireworks, or other combustible matter, within the Town-owned land known as the Punkhorn Parklands; provided, however, this section shall not apply to any person abating nuisance or in the exercise of duty required by law: provided further that bow hunting only shall only be permitted during a three-week period beginning on the first Monday in December of each year, or to take any other action relative thereto. (Citizen's Petition) (Majority Vote Required) COMMENT Select Board: Yes 2, No 3, Abs 0 Finance Committee: Yes 0, No 0, Abs 0 OTHER BUSINESS ARTICLE NO. 24 To act upon any other business that may legally come before this meeting; or to take any other action related thereto. (Select Board) (Majority Vote Required) Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 MEMORANDUM TO: Select Board FROM: Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator RE: Citizens Petitions on Punkhorn Hunting Restrictions DATE: February 11, 2022 At the Spring 2022 Annual Town Meeting, Brewster voters approved a citizens petition seeking to ban hunting on Town property in the Punkhorn. Prior to that deliberation and vote, Town counsel opined that such a ban could be binding in nature based on their interpretation of the statute and relevant case law. Town officials worked with the petitioner to draft the petition to be binding, not advisory in nature. After the warrant closed, Town counsel raised concerns about the form of the petition as submitted. Just before Town Meeting, town counsel provided proposed language to make a motion on the floor to amend the petition which would have made wholesale changes to the petition as included in the warrant book. This motion was not brought to the petitioners attention given the late hour in which it was received and concerns about causing confusion at Town Meeting. After approval by Town Meeting, the article was submitted by the Town Clerk to the MA Attorney General for their review. In August, they sought an extension of their review period and, in October, they ultimately issued their approval of the article as not being inconsistent with relevant state law. Following this state review and approval, town counsel opined that the article was not in the appropriate form to be codified as a Town bylaw. Accordingly, the vote last May was advisory. When the petitioner was informed of these developments, they were understandably frustrated and disappointed. I then worked with Town counsel to draft a new petition in proper form, which is what is now under consideration. At the same time, another resident expressed interest in submitting a separate citizens petition seeking to allow hunting in the Punkhorn with certain restrictions. Both petitions will be included on the May 2022 warrant. Office of: Select Board Town Administrator KP Law, P.C. | Boston • Hyannis • Lenox • Northampton • Worcester February 10, 2021 Jonathan M. Silverstein jsilverstein@k-plaw.com CONFIDENTIAL - NOT A PUBLIC DOCUMENT Mr. Peter Lombardi Town Administrator Brewster Town Hall 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-3701 Re: Punkhorn Parklands Hunting Prohibition Bylaw Dear Mr. Lombardi: You have requested an opinion regarding a potential Town Meeting warrant article under consideration concerning hunting on Punkhorn Parklands (the “Parklands”). Specifically, you have informed me that ten or more registered voters are considering petitioning an article for the 2021 Annual Town Meeting warrant that would prohibit hunting on the Parklands, and you have requested an opinion as to the form of such an article whether Town Meeting has the authority to pass an article to that effect. It is my understanding that, at the request of several residents, the Conservation Commission and Department of Natural Resources recently took steps, in consultation with the Select Board, to expand hunting on the Parklands on a limited basis. A separate group of residents has now requested that a warrant article to prohibit hunting on the Parklands be presented to the upcoming Town Meeting. A member of the citizen group seeking to prohibit hunting on the Parklands has suggested the Town adopt a bylaw similar to that recently approved by the Provincetown Town Meeting.1 As described below, in my opinion, Town Meeting likely has the authority to pass a bylaw prohibiting hunting on public property, such as the Parkland. 1 At its September 21, 2020 Annual Town Meeting, Provincetown voters approved the following amendments to Chapter 13 of the Provincetown General Bylaws: No person shall discharge any gun, including paint ball guns, fowling piece, pistol, or firearm or release an arrow from a bow or hunt or trap or poison or set fire to any material known as fireworks, or other combustible matter, in any of the public ways, streets or places of the Town, including but not limited to conservation land or other Town owned property, except for lands under control of the Cape Cod National Seashore and Clapp’s Pond Property; except on such occasions approved by the Select Board upon public notice; provided, however, this section shall not apply to any person abating nuisance or in the exercise of duty required by law. Mr. Peter Lombardi Town Administrator February 10, 2021 Page 2 Legal Background Town Meeting is the Town’s legislative body, and the Select Board is its chief executive. Brewster General Bylaws, §§5-2 (Town Meeting is legislative branch) and 5-3 (Select Board serves executive function); see generally Twomey v. Town of Middleborough, 468 Mass. 260, 263 (2014). As such, Town Meeting may not exercise executive powers or direct, compel, or control executive action. See Anderson v. Board of Selectmen of Wrentham, 406 Mass. 508, 512 (1990); Breault v. Town of Auburn, 303 Mass. 424, 428 (1939). Town Meeting cannot direct or control “one whose duties have been defined by the Legislature.” Breault, 303 Mass. at 428 (quoting Daddario v. City of Pittsfield, 301 Mass. 552, 558 (1938)). “More specifically, a town meeting cannot exercise authority over a board of selectmen when the board is acting in furtherance of a statutory duty.” Twomey, 468 Mass. at 270. However, as the legislative body, Town Meeting may enact bylaws that direct public officials to act or refrain from acting in certain circumstances. Under the Home Rule Amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution, Article 89 of the Articles of Amendment, and the Home Rule Procedures Act, G.L. c. 43B, §13, municipalities may enact local bylaws on any subject so long as the local enactment is not inconsistent with the laws or constitution of the Commonwealth. See generally Bloom v. City of Worcester, 363 Mass. 136 (1973). A local law may be inconsistent with state law if it is in direct conflict with the state law, or if the Legislature has so occupied a field that local regulation has been implicitly preempted. See id. at 279-280. However, to be preempted, the conflict in the state and local law must be “sharp,” and absent a comprehensive statutory scheme regulating a subject, municipalities “through their by-laws may supplement the statutory provisions so long as their by- laws are not inconsistent with any State law.” Marshfield Family Skateland, Inc. v. Town of Marshfield, 389 Mass. 436, 442 (1983) (town may prohibit an activity notwithstanding state statute allowing local licensing board to issue licenses for that activity). As relevant to both issues described above, hunting on public property and parklands is prohibited under G.L. c. 131, §59 unless the public body with custody of the property permits it. Specifically, said Section 59 provides: A person shall not hunt, or in any manner molest or destroy, any bird or mammal within the boundaries of any reservation, park or common, or any land owned or leased by the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, or any land held in trust for public use; except that the authorities or persons having the control and charge of such reservations, parks, commons or other lands, may, with such limitations as they deem advisable, permit the hunting, within said boundaries during the applicable open season of any birds or mammals. [Emphasis added.] Mr. Peter Lombardi Town Administrator February 10, 2021 Page 3 Analysis In my opinion Town Meeting likely has the authority to adopt a bylaw, similar to the one approved by the Provincetown Town Meeting, which prohibits hunting on public ways, conservation land, or other Town property, because that is a proper legislative action. Although the bylaw approved at the Provincetown Town Meeting is still under review at the Office of the Attorney General, I note that similar bylaws have been approved in other communities, such as Norfolk, Canton and Needham. In fact, in approving similar portions of a bylaw enacted by the Town of Norfolk, the Attorney General specifically found that a bylaw prohibiting hunting on Town-owned land without the permission of the Board of Selectmen was consistent with G.L. c. 131, §59. As observed by the Attorney General, it is my opinion such a bylaw is not inconsistent with State law and, in fact, the regulation of hunting on public lands is expressly allowed pursuant to G.L. c. 131, §59. It is, likewise, my opinion that the fact that the property may be held by the Town for conservation purposes does not alter this conclusion. Though the Conservation Commission has jurisdiction over conservation lands in the Town, it is my opinion that Town Meeting, through the passage of a bylaw, may exercise concurrent jurisdiction in this area. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. Beacon Hill Architectural Commission, 421 Mass. 570 (1996) (recognizing that different departments in same municipality may have jurisdiction over related subject-matter). Therefore, in my opinion, that Town Meeting likely has the authority to enact a bylaw prohibiting hunting on Town-owned land, including the Parklands. I will inform you as soon as the Attorney General’s Office approves or disapproves the Provincetown Bylaw. If that bylaw is disapproved, the Town could consider a home rule petition for special legislation to authorize adoption of the bylaw. If you have any additional questions concerning these issues, please do not hesitate to contact me. JMS/MVS/man 750276/BREW/0001 Very truly yours, Jonathan M. Silverstein THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS DIVISION 10 MECHANIC STREET, SUITE 301 WORCESTER, MA 01608 (508) 792-7600 (508) 795-1991 fax www.mass.gov/ago October 17, 2021 Colette M. Williams, Town Clerk Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631 Re: Brewster Annual Town Meeting of May 15, 2021 -- Case # 10110 Warrant Articles # 23 and 25 (General) Dear Ms. Williams: Article 25 - Under Article 25 the Town voted to prohibit the discharge of firearms and hunting on certain town-owned land. We approve Article 25 because it is consistent with G.L. c. 131, § 59 that prohibits hunting on “any land owned or leased by the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof” unless “the authorities or persons having the control and charge of such reservations, parks, commons or other lands” specifically authorizes hunting on such land during the applicable open season. G.L. c. 131, § 59. In this decision, we summarize the by-law amendment adopted under Article 25 and the Attorney General’s standard of review of town by-laws, and then explain why, based on our standard of review, we approve Article 25. 1 I. Summary of Article 25 Under Article 25 the Town voted, in relevant part, as follows: To see if the Town will vote to prohibit in the Punkhorn Parklands (see map and FY2021 Punkhorn Parklands Parcels, number 1-108, below): the discharge of firearms or hunting. No person shall discharge any gun, including paint ball guns, fowling piece, pistol, or firearm or release an arrow from a bow or hunt or trap or poison in the area of town-owned parcels in southwest Brewster, typically referred to as the Punkhorn. This petition will not affect municipal use as outlined in the “Wildland Fire Protection and Preparedness Plan for the Punkhorn 1 In a decision issued August 6, 2021, we approved Article 23 and by agreement with Town Counsel extended our deadline for review of Article 25 for an additional 60-days until October 17, 2021. 2 Parklands” or the Town’s use of sharp shooters for hire to control nuisance or injured wildlife [ ]. 2 II. Attorney General’s Standard of Review Pursuant to G.L. c. 40, § 32, the Attorney General has a “limited power of disapproval,” and “[i]t is fundamental that every presumption is to be made in favor of the validity of municipal by-laws.” Amherst v. Attorney General, 398 Mass. 793, 795-96 (1986). The Attorney General does not review the policy arguments for or against the enactment. Id. at 798-99 (“Neither we nor the Attorney General may comment on the wisdom of the town’s by-law.”) Rather, in order to disapprove a by-law (or any portion thereof), the Attorney General must cite an inconsistency between the by-law and the Constitution or laws of the Commonwealth. Id. at 796. “As a general proposition the cases dealing with the repugnancy or inconsistency of local regulations with State statutes have given considerable latitude to municipalities, requiring a sharp conflict between the local and State provisions before the local regulation has been held invalid.” Bloom v. Worcester, 363 Mass. 136, 154 (1973) (emphasis added). In order for a court (or this Office) to find that a town is preempted from regulating an activity, “[t]he legislative intent to preclude local action must be clear.” Bloom, 363 Mass. at 155. This legislative intent can be either express or implied. “In other words, local action is precluded either where the Legislature has made an explicit indication of its intention in this respect, or the purpose of State legislation would be frustrated [by a local enactment] so as to warrant an inference that the Legislature intended to preempt the field.” St. George Greek Orthodox Cathedral v. Springfield, 462 Mass. 120, 126 (2012) (internal quotations and citation omitted). The “comprehensive nature” of a statute can indicate the “the Legislature intended to preempt local entities from enacting legislation in [an] area” covered by the statute. Boston Gas Co. v. Somerville, 420 Mass. 702, 704 (1995). III. The Town May Regulate the Discharge of Firearms Within Its Borders. Because Article 25 relates to both the discharge of firearms and hunting it is important to distinguish between the two. As further explained below, the activity of hunting is comprehensively regulated throughout the Commonwealth and thus municipalities are preempted from imposing restrictions on hunting that differ from Chapter 131 and other applicable statutes. However, the Town is allowed to regulate the discharge of firearms within its borders. See Brown v. Carlisle, 336 Mass. 147, 150-151 (1957) (upholding a firearm discharge by-law because “[t]he enumeration of [Chapter 131 and other] statutes demonstrates that the State has not excluded the type of legislation here undertaken by the defendant town…We are not confronted with an attempt to regulate hunting….”) (emphasis supplied); See also Amherst, 2 Neither the “Wildland Fire Protection and Preparedness Plan for the Punkhorn Parklands,” nor any Town policies or regulations regarding “the Town’s use of sharp shooters for hire to control nuisance or injured wildlife” have been filed with this Office and we have no jurisdiction to review or opine on this Plan or policies. Therefore, in issuing this decision on our review of the Town’s by-law, we take no position on the legality of the Plan or any such policies or regulations. 3 398 Mass. at 797-798 (rejecting argument that Amherst’s firearm discharge by-law is preempted by Chapter 131 because “the Amherst by-law in no way frustrates those sections” of Chapter 131 which “concern the safe use of certain firearms.”). On this basis, we approve the text in Article 25 that prohibits the discharge of firearms. IV. Towns Cannot Regulate Hunting Except as Provided in Chapter 131 In contrast to the discharge of firearms, the activity of hunting is comprehensively regulated by General Laws Chapter 131 and related statutes and regulations that preempt the field. Chapter 131 imposes “carefully guarded conditions by which one may hunt in the Commonwealth safely, provisions by which one is licensed, and provisions designed to preserve and maintain the wildlife and natural resources of the Commonwealth.” Amherst, 398 Mass. at 797. Chapter 131 grants the Director of the Department of Fish and Game/Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW Director) wide-ranging authority over hunting in the Commonwealth (see generally G.L. c. 131, § 4, and 321 CMR 3.01 et seq.), and further grants the DFW authority to adopt comprehensive regulations governing hunting, which are embodied in 321 CMR 3.00 et seq. Pursuant to G.L. c. 131, § 5, “Except as provided in rules and regulations made under authority of this section, and except as otherwise provided in [Chapter 131], a person shall not fish, hunt, …”. Chapter 131 does not expressly preempt local regulation of hunting. However, the broad scope of Chapter 131, and the extensive powers granted to the DFW Director to regulate hunting, indicate a legislative intent that Chapter 131 occupies the field of hunting regulation. Towns are thus preempted from local regulation of hunting except as expressly provided in Chapter 131. See Boston Edison Co. v. Town of Bedford, 444 Mass. 775 (2005) (town by-law imposing fines for failure to remove utility poles preempted by the comprehensive, uniform state regulation of utilities in G.L. c. 164); Wendell v. Attorney General, 394 Mass. 518 (1985) (town by-law regulating the use of pesticides in town frustrates the statutory purpose of centralized regulation of pesticide use). Because of the Legislature’s comprehensive grant of authority to the DFW to be the exclusive, state-wide regulator of hunting in the Commonwealth, towns are preempted from imposing by-law requirements which are inconsistent with G.L. c. 131 and related statutes and regulations. Thus, towns may only impose their local hunting requirements in those two categories expressly provided in Chapter 131: municipally owned lands (see G.L. c. 131, § 59); and Great Ponds not exceeding 500 acres in size (see G.L. c. 131, § 45). V. Article 25 Is Consistent with General Laws Chapter 131, § 59 that Prohibits Hunting on Town-Owned Land Unless the Town Allows It. We approve Article 25 because it is consistent with the statutory prohibition of hunting on town-owned land without town authorization. General Laws Chapter 131, Section 59 provides that a person shall not hunt on “any land owned or leased by the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof” except that the persons having control and charge of such lands may “permit 4 the hunting, within said boundaries during the applicable open season of any birds or mammals.” Specifically, Section 59 provides as follows (with emphasis added): A person shall not hunt, or in any manner molest or destroy, any bird or mammal within the boundaries of any reservation, park or common, or any land owned or leased by the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, or any land held in trust for public use; except that the authorities or persons having the control and charge of such reservations, parks, commons or other lands, may, with such limitations as they deem advisable, permit the hunting, within said boundaries during the applicable open season of any birds or mammals. The authorities or persons having the control and charge of such reservations, parks, commons or land owned or leased or held for public use, the director of law enforcement, his deputy directors of enforcement, chiefs of enforcement, deputy chiefs of enforcement, environmental police officers, deputy environmental police officers, wardens and members of the state police in areas over which they have jurisdiction and all officers qualified to serve criminal process shall enforce this section. This section shall not apply to state forests acquired under section thirty or section thirty- three of chapter one hundred and thirty-two or any other provision of law, or to state parks and reservations under the control of the division of forests and parks of the department of environmental management. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit any agency of the commonwealth or any political subdivision of the commonwealth from permitting the hunting, during the applicable open season, in any area owned or leased by it, of any bird or mammal, or from entering into agreements with the director for the establishment of wildlife management areas. Chapter 131 authorizes towns to determine whether to allow hunting on town-owned property. Because the parcels listed in Article 25 are town-owned, we approve Article 25 as consistent with Chapter 131. VI. Article 25 Must be Applied Consistent with General Laws Chapter 131, § 45 that Requires Great Ponds to Be Accessible for Hunting. General Laws Chapter 131, Section 45 requires that a Great Pond “shall be public for the purpose of hunting or boating thereon.” Further, G.L. c. 131, § 45 provides that “[a]ll persons shall be allowed reasonable means of access to such ponds for the purposes aforesaid,” which includes hunting. Specifically, G.L. c. 131, § 45, provides in relevant part as follows: Except as otherwise provided in this section and elsewhere in this chapter, every great pond not actively being used as a source of water supply of any town, water supply or fire district or public institution, and not subject to the provisions of section one hundred and sixty of chapter one hundred and eleven, shall be public for the purpose of hunting or boating thereon and shall, notwithstanding the provisions of any special law relating to fisheries in any particular place, be open to all inhabitants of the commonwealth for fishing purposes; provided that any city or town in which the whole or any portion of any great pond not exceeding five hundred acres in extent is situated may, as to so much thereof, as is located within its boundaries, make and enforce rules and regulations relative to hunting, fishing and boating thereon….Any such rules or regulations shall, to the extent that they authorize hunting or fishing or, both, be subject to the approval of the director, and to the extent that they authorize any other use thereof, be subject to the 5 approval of the commissioner of environmental protection or to the extent that they impose restrictions upon the speed limit, a limitation on engine horsepower, a prohibition of the use of internal combustion engines, a ban on water skiing and other high speed uses, and a limitation of such uses to certain areas and certain times, be subject to the approval of the director of law enforcement. All persons shall be allowed reasonable means of access to such ponds for the purposes aforesaid. General Laws Chapter 131, Section 45 defines a “Great Pond” as: “a natural pond the area of which is twenty acres or more.” According to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, there are several Great Ponds located in Brewster. See https://www.mass.gov/doc/massachusetts-great-ponds-list/download. Moreover, it appears that some of these Great Ponds are located in or near the Punkhorns, including Seymour Pond, Upper Mill Pond and Walkers Pond. See Northern Punkhorn Trail Map available on the Town’s website (https://brewster-ma.gov/files/Punkhorn_North_Section_Trail_Map.pdf).3 While it does not appear that any of these Great Ponds are part of the 108 parcels identified by map and parcel number in Article 25, the Town must ensure that Article 25 is applied consistent with G.L. c. 131, § 45. Thus, the Town cannot apply Article 25’s hunting prohibition to any Great Pond located in the Punkhorns.4 Further, because it appears that certain of the listed parcels may abut Great Ponds, the Town cannot apply the by-law in such a way as to impede access to Great Ponds for the statutorily protected activities of hunting, fishing, and boating, as established by G.L. c. 131, § 45. The Town should consult with Town Counsel with any questions on this issue. VII. Conclusion Because the by-law adopted under Article 25 is consistent with G.L. c. 131, § 59, we approve it. However, the Town is not authorized to prohibit hunting on Great Ponds and the by- law cannot apply to any Great Ponds in the Town, except as specifically outlined in G.L. c. 131, § 45. Note: Pursuant to G.L. c. 40, § 32, neither general nor zoning by-laws take effect unless the Town has first satisfied the posting/publishing requirements of that statute. Once this statutory duty is fulfilled, (1) general by-laws and amendments take effect on the date these posting and publishing requirements are satisfied unless a later effective date is prescribed in the by-law, and (2) zoning by-laws and amendments are deemed to have taken effect from the date they were approved by the Town Meeting, unless a later effective date is prescribed in the by-law. 3 See also DEP Great Pond Information as follows: (1) Walkers Pond: https://www.mass.gov/doc/walkers- pond/download (2) Seymour Pond: https://www.mass.gov/doc/dfwseymopdf/download; and (3) Upper Mill Pond: https://www.mass.gov/doc/dfwwalkupdf/download . 4 We note that G.L. c. 131, § 45 grants to certain categories of cities and town the right to make rules and regulations regarding hunting on great ponds not exceeding five hundred acres, but it requires that such rules and regulations be approved by the Director. See Pearson v. Plymouth, 44 Mass. App. Ct. 741, 744 (1998) (“All such [great pond] rules and regulations are subject to the approvals of various State administrative agencies having special competence and responsibility in the particular subject, e.g., …rules and regulations authorizing hun ting and fishing are subject to the approval of the director of fisheries and wildlife.”) 6 Very truly yours, MAURA HEALEY ATTORNEY GENERAL Margaret J. Hurley by: Margaret J. Hurley, Assistant Attorney General Chief, Central Massachusetts Division Director, Municipal Law Unit Ten Mechanic Street, Suite 301 Worcester, MA 01608 (508) 792-7600 x 4402 cc: Town Counsel Jonathan Silverstein Nauset Regional Assessments Town Assessment %Variance Assessment % Total Assessment Brewster 48.16670%12,188,914.82 47.40740%12,709,731.94 Eastham 19.83330%5,018,953.02 19.58850%5,251,597.52 Orleans 19.08330%4,829,160.36 21.07000%5,648,781.67 Wellfleet 12.91670%3,268,659.80 11.93420%3,199,510.69 1 25,305,688.00 100.00010%26,809,621.81 Total Assesment 25,305,688.00 26,809,595.00 1.059429603 FY 22 FY 23 @ 5.9% Variance Assessment % Total Assessment Variance from FY22 Savings 520,817.12 47.40740%12,296,687.95 107,773.13 413,043.99 232,644.50 19.58850%5,080,929.81 61,976.79 170,667.71 819,621.31 21.07000%5,465,206.17 636,045.82 183,575.49 (69,149.12)11.93420%3,095,532.20 (173,127.60)103,978.48 1,503,933.81 100.00010%25,938,356.14 632,668.14 871,265.67 25,938,330.20 1.025 FY 23 at 2.5% increase (if assessments only rose 2.5%) OPERATING EXPENSE ONLY % increase FY22 Actual (OpX + Revolving Funds)34,474,602$ FY23 Proposed (OpX + Revolving Funds)36,464,667$ 5.8% FY23 if 2.5% increase 35,336,467$ 2.5% Savings v. Proposed - District Total 1,128,200$ Brewster Orleans Eastham Wellfleet FY23 Assessment %47.41%21.07%19.59%11.93% Savings 534,850$ 237,712$ 220,997$ 134,642$ Savings on FY23 Assessment if OpX increase capped at 2.5% NAUSET REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT - SAVINGS WITH 2.5% OpX BUDGET CAP Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 MEMORANDUM TO: Select Board FROM: Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator RE: Update on Water Quality Project Funding Options and Discussion of Next Steps Relative to Brewster’s Continued Participation in Cape Cod & Islands Water Protection Fund (CCIWPF) DATE: February 25, 2022 Following the joint meeting with the Select Board and Board of Health on January 27 where Mark Nelson from Horsley Witten provided an update on the Town’s water quality initiatives and financing options, I met with our legislative delegation on February 15 at the direction of the Select Board. To recap, Brewster visitors have contributed over $2.6M to the CCIWPF to date – about $1M/year via a 2.75% tax on all lodging. We have not yet received any funding back. At the same time, we have had to appropriate Brewster taxpayer funds (Free Cash) to pay for several water quality initiatives. Per MA Department of Environmental Protection feedback on our anticipated projects (see attached), we only expect to secure about $4M from the CCIWPF toward our $30+M in water quality-related, long- term capital needs. Our delegation’s collective feedback was as follows: - They will not support a Special Act to direct 2.75% (or any other amount) of lodging revenues to a Brewster-specific Water Protection Fund – essentially mirroring the CCIWPF on the local, instead of regional, level. - They suggested we consider adoption of the 3% community impact for short- term rentals. As previously discussed, this local option (MGL Ch 64G Sec 3D) requires a simple majority vote of Town Meeting to adopt. The way the statute is structured, this fee may be imposed on either only professionally managed short-term rentals or on all short-term rentals. This fee is administered and collected by the MA Department of Revenue, just like the CCIWPF. Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Brewster contributes about $1M/year to the CCIWPF. Our traditional lodging & short-term rental revenues (6% tax on each) total approximately $2.3M, about $1.1M from short-term rentals alone. Accordingly, we anticipate collecting at least $500k/year in new revenues if we were to adopt the 3% community impact fee on all short-term rentals, at least 35% of which must be spent on “affordable housing or local infrastructure projects”. Town counsel has opined that all of our proposed upcoming water quality projects would fit within the definition of “local infrastructure”. The local option could take effect as early as July 1, 2022. Practically speaking, we would also need to bring an article to Town Meeting seeking to create a new Water Quality Stabilization Fund to which at least 35%, and potentially 100% (especially since we are already directing 50% of current short-term rental revenues to the Affordable Housing Trust), of these new revenues would be directed. Appropriation from this stabilization fund would require a 2/3 majority vote of Town Meeting. - They expressed support to work with Brewster in the coming months to try to expand our eligibility for State Revolving Fund (SRF) & CCIWPF financing for our projects by coordinating a meeting with relevant MA Department of Environmental Protection and Clean Water Trust officials to explore current state regulations that impact use of these fund sources for innovative/alternative systems on private property. They recognize that this is, or likely will be, a regional issue, not entirely unique to Brewster. Depending on the outcome of this meeting with state officials, they also offered to assist in revisiting current CCIWPF regulations and by-laws to see whether potential changes could be made to those that would expand eligible uses to more closely align with our planned projects, especially those related to innovative/alternative septic systems. As a reminder, MGL Ch 29C Sec 19 requires a 2/3 majority vote of Town Meeting to opt out of the CCIWPF. Members who opt out can, by vote of Town Meeting, opt back in but would not be eligible for funding until Year 3 of their return. It would take several months to work through these potential solutions – certainly well after the deadline for this Spring’s Town Meeting warrant. However, given the significant long-term financial implications of this decision and that state involvement/oversight of pond water quality may evolve over time, I recommend we partner with our legislative delegation to clearly and definitively identify the extent to which we will be able to access SRF and CCIWPF to finance a greater share of our planned water quality initiatives. It is important to note that we do not have any major planned water quality initiatives on our 5-year Capital Improvement Plan in FY23. We currently plan to use $175k in Free Cash for water quality consulting services and initiatives next year. It is also worth noting that the attached Short-Term Rental Revenue Allocation Policy supports directing at least 25% of these existing revenues to Capital Stabilization. For FY23, we have proposed directing $300k (or 40%) of these funds to Capital Stabilization. If approved at that amount, the Capital Stabilization fund balance would be $1.025M. We could create a new Water Quality Stabilization fund at Town Meeting this spring and direct 15% ($112,500) of these existing STR revenues to that new fund for FY23 to help cover most of our planned water quality projects next year. If we were to take that approach, our contribution to the general Capital Stabilization fund in the FY23 operating budget would proportionately decrease to $187,500. Town of Brewster Financial Policies SHORT-TERM RENTAL REVENUES PURPOSE To help the Town allocate this significant new funding source in a manner that it is fiscally prudent, financially sustainable, and consistent with the Town’s strategic policies, programs, services, and assets. Avoiding reliance on this funding source as a key element in developing or balancing the Town’s annual operating budget is a prudent practice. Investment of these funds in building capital reserves and creating a reliable, dedicating funding stream to support the Town’s affordable housing initiatives creates substantial investment in areas that are otherwise challenging to fund given budgetary constraints and other pressing operational and capital needs. This policy is consistent with the Town’s Financial Reserves policy regarding our commitment to building our capacity to fund major capital projects by growing our Capital Stabilization fund. APPLICABILITY This policy pertains to the annual operating and capital decision-making duties of the Select Board, Town Administrator, Finance Committee, and Affordable Housing Trust. It also applies to the related job duties of the Finance Director and Treasurer Collector. POLICY A. Revenues The Town has been particularly conservative in estimating short-term rental revenues since their inception for the following reasons:  Imposition and collection of this surcharge is still relatively new (FY20);  Specific short-term rental revenue data from MA Department of Revenue is new (FY21);  Town does not regulate short-term rentals, leading to uncertainty regarding our local revenue collection rates;  Entire lodging industry has been impacted by the pandemic. The Town is committed to continuing to conservatively project anticipated short-term rental revenues, but plans to more closely align our budget to actual figures over the next several years as we have access to more and better data. During this transition period, the Town’s certified Free Cash totals may be higher than historical actuals due to our conservative practices in this area. Even after this initial transition period, the Town will continue to be conservative in our short-term rental revenue estimates since this industry can be significantly impacted by external market and economic factors outside of the Town’s control and it is not currently regulated at the local level. B. Expenditures The Town is committed to establishing a permanent funding mechanism to support the Affordable Housing Trust and to investing in building its capital reserves. As such, the Town will allocate future fiscal year short-term rental revenues according to the following guidelines:  50% to the Affordable Housing Trust;  25+% to Capital Stabilization, until and unless that reserve fund balance totals 10% of the Town’s total General Fund annual operating budget amount, consistent with our Financial Reserves policy;  Priority one-time capital projects/acquisitions, including those related to wastewater and water quality;  No more than 10% to other targeted investments in our operating budget that advance goals identified in the Select Board’s Strategic Plan, preferably those that relate to the revenue source. Appropriations for such purposes shall be included in the Town’s annual operating budget such that our recommended expenditures in a given fiscal year align with projected short-term rental revenues for that year. During the transition period where projected short-term rental revenues may lag behind actuals, the Town may consider Free Cash appropriations consistent with these expenditure guidelines. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy was adopted on May 3, 2021. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy was adopted on May 3, 2021. 100% Recycled Paper 482 Main Street | Dennis, MA 02638 Tel: 508-619-3185 | info@apcc.org | www.apcc.org Andrew Gottlieb Executive Director BOARD OF DIRECTORS Eliza McClennen President Steven Koppel Vice President Bob Ciolek Treasurer Jack Looney Clerk John Cumbler Margo Fenn Joshua Goldberg DeeDee Holt Thomas Huettner Pat Hughes Elysse Magnotto-Cleary Blue Magruder Stephen Mealy Wendy Northcross Kris Ramsay Robert Summersgill Charles Sumner Taryn Wilson February 15, 2022 Ms. Cynthia Bingham, Chair Brewster Select Board Brewster Town Hall 2198 Main St. Brewster, MA 02631 Dear Ms. Bingham: We are writing as Brewster residents and members of the Board of Directors of the Association to Preserve Cape Cod. On behalf of the entire APCC Board, we are writing to express our collective concern about the recently discussed withdrawal of the Town of Brewster from the Cape and Islands Water Protection Fund. Simply put, we view this discussion as not in the best interests of the region or the taxpayers of the Town of Brewster. It is our goal to redirect the conversation to how best to maximize Brewster’s utilization of this remarkably useful and beneficial tool. The Fund was born of a recognition that the entire Cape has a water quality problem that demanded a regional approach to be cost effectively resolved. It was not until the idea underpinning the Fund came to the fore and connected all the 15 municipal dots into a complete picture that the Legislature saw fit to act. The Fund has allocated over $71 million to eight Cape towns in just its first year of making awards and has regulations committing to a 50% subsidy of future projects under $1 million and 25% for future projects over $1 million. The Fund is, by any objective measure, a success, and it provides a framework in which all Cape towns can proceed individually and collectively to address water quality issues. Financing of the Fund is through a surcharge on short-term rentals, not from Brewster taxpayers. If Brewster were to withdraw from the Fund, the surcharge would be eliminated, requiring Brewster property taxpayers to assume the full costs of addressing the Town’s water quality issues. As we understand it, your concerns seem focused on SRF limitations possibly restricting the funds available to the Town. Having reviewed the package of information presented to the Select Board, we see few, if any, SRF limitations that would impede the Town from optimizing access to Fund subsidy. The DEP letter discussing eligibility provided a clear path to enabling most, if not all, of the Town’s projects to be considered SRF eligible. While the non-conventional aspect of some of the management strategies pose some need to customize projects to meet SRF criteria, such an effort should not be dismissed. APCC has resources and expertise to offer the Town to explore these questions and the Cape Cod Commission similarly has technical assistance resources that can be deployed to 100% Recycled Paper 482 Main Street | Dennis, MA 02638 Tel: 508-619-3185 | info@apcc.org | www.apcc.org Brewster to assist. Rather than assume these minor challenges cannot be addressed and to use that conclusion as the basis of an exit strategy, we recommend that an alternative path be taken. Together, let us commit to developing a strategy that seeks to maximize utilization of the resources that already reside within the Fund rather than turn away from the funds it has to offer and walk down a path that is almost certain to face significant legislative challenges. Brewster has a well-established history of creative problem solving. We hope you will work with us to make the Fund work for Brewster before abandoning one of the most effective and transformative financing methods ever made available to Cape towns. We look forward to constructively engaging with the Town to develop a plan that optimizes the financial resources available to Brewster. We would request a meeting with your Select Board before any decisions are made to seek withdrawal from the Fund and await your guidance on the best way to proceed. Thank you for your consideration. On Behalf of the APCC Board, Eliza McClennen Charles Sumner Pat Hughes Steven Koppel Kris Ramsay cc: Brewster Select Board Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator Senator Julian Cyr Representative Sarah Peake Representative Tim Whalen Archive d: Friday, February 25, 2022 2:50:47 PM From: Susan Bridges Se nt: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 22:22:08 To: Peter Lombardi Cc: Cynthia Bingham; Amy von Hone; Chris Miller; Board of Directors Subje ct: Water Resource Management Se ns itivity: Normal Peter Lombardi Town Administrator Brewster Town Hall 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631 Dear Peter (with Cindy, Amy and Chris on copy), Thank you s o much for joining us yesterday in the planning of the Brews ter Ponds Summit (BPS) to be held this spring. The Pond Summ it will be a great learning opportunity for all of us and could help s et the s tage for next s teps in improving things for Brewster’s groundwater and ponds . W e look forward to partnering with the town on this event! (An updated draft outline will be forthcoming soon.) W e also want to thank you for organizing the January 27, 2022 joint BOS/BOH presentation by Mark Nelson updating progress on the town’s Integrated W ater Res ources Management Plan (IW RMP.) This was a valuable way to bring everyone up to date on what has been ac c omplished and som e of the projects still underway. The BPC supports your efforts to explore all funding alternatives for water protec tion measures, including considering the amount of m oney that can be accessed, the likelihood of obtaining funds and the flexibility to us e funds for the types of water protection meas ures that m ay be needed. W e agree it m akes sense to explore the possibility of legis lative changes to allow Brewster to establish its own funding m ec hanism . Als o, before m aking a decis ion about C&IW PF participation, we urge you and the Selec t Board to engage the Cape Cod Commission and others to s eek out every funding opportunity pos sible for these important projects. The Cape Cod Com mis s ion’s Technical Support staff, Brian Baum gaertel and George Heufelder at MASSTC, Zee Crocker at The Barnstable Clean W ater Coalition, Andrew Gottlieb, and others who are now testing and putting IA s ystem s and s ewers in the ground, could provide valuable guidance re: SRF and C&IW PF funding. Our sense is that while the MA DEP prefers funding c ons ervative solutions like c entral sewers, the creation of a res pons ible managem ent entity (RME) involving the Town of Brews ter could go a long way toward res olving their questions of monitoring the effectiveness of IA sys tems and achieving funding. The Cape & Is land W ater Protection Fund regulations s pec ific ally state: “These projects include, but are not limited to, the use of innovative strategies and alternative septic system technologies, the com pletion and update of water quality and wastewater m anagement plans , the construc tion of sewer collection systems and was tewater treatm ent plants, and the implementation of drainage improvem ents and water treatm ent program s to im prove water quality in freshwater ponds and marine res ources. “ The Board of the BPC asks to be fully engaged with the town in pond and water quality planning going forward. W e have a knowledgeable Board and a tremendous base of experienced and dedicated volunteers, som e of whom are semi-retired environmental engineers, scientists and m ore. Last sum mer’s Citiz ens Science Team counted more than 50 volunteers who worked closely with the Brewster Board of Health on c yanobacteria m onitoring. Another team of volunteers is researching bioremediation as an alternative to alum. There’s a lot to be done in Brewster on groundwater and pond protec tion and remediation and we can bring a lot to this partnership! Best, Susan Bridges, President PS: Pleas e s ee these video links below for valuable bac kground information: Re sponsible Manage ment Entities (RME’s) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzjvmJwaiHA A s hort 10 m inute video from Patty Daley, CCC Legal and Polic y Specialis t, 508-744-1212, pdaley@capecodcomm ission.org Adv ance s in (Innov ativ e/Alte rnative ) IA septic syste ms - https://vime o.com/607654098 A 1-hr video presentation by the NEW EA (New England W ater Environment As s ociation.) Inc ludes dis c us sions by Brian Baumgaetel Direc tor of MASSTC (The Mas s ac husetts Alternative Septic System Tes t Center,) Scott Hors ley - with som e c omm ents about establishing RME’s and his work with the Town Of W ellfleet. Barnstable Cle an Wate r Coalition - https://bcle anwate r.org/re sources/bcwc-video-library/v ide o-library-se ptic-syste ms/ Videos on their latest installation of IA systems near Shubael Pond. Zee Crocker - Executive Director, 508-420-0780 MEMORANDUM To: Ryan Bennett, Town Planner Chris Miller, Natural Resource Director From: Mark Nelson Date: July 29, 2021 Re: Evaluation of the Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund Support And its Benefits to the Town of Brewster Introduction The Horsley Witten Group, Inc. (HW) evaluated potential opportunities for the Town of Brewster to receive funding for water quality improvement projects under the recently created Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund (CCIWPF). The goals were to consider the funding potential for current projects needed to implement the Town’s Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (IWRMP) and to improve water quality in the numerous freshwater ponds in Brewster. HW evaluated the eligibility for funding through the CCIWPF which is based on the approval of projects at the state level through the Massachusetts Clean Water Trust. A review of anticipated projects was also conducted to evaluate the potential for SRF funding which would then make them eligible for CCIWPF funding. Details are provided below, including a list of questions to ask of the Clean Water Trust to clarify the Town’s funding potential under the SRF and the CCIWPF. Eligibility for Funding To receive funds through the CCIWPF, a Town must apply for and be granted state revolving loan (SRF) funding from the MA Clean Water Trust. If the Trust approves a project, it is then eligible for funding from the CCIWPF which is used to repay the SRF loan. • For a project to be eligible for SRF funding, the Trust requires prior approval of a comprehensive wastewater management plan, IWRMP, targeted watershed plan or project specific plan. SRF funds can be obtained for planning projects, such as for the design and permitting of a neighborhood wastewater treatment plant. If planning funds are awarded, they can be used to create a project specific plan which, if approved, can then be used to request SRF funding for a construction project. • Cape Cod Commission CWA Section 208 approval is also required for a project to be eligible for SRF funding. The Commission has not reviewed Brewster’s IWRMP. However, they will review individual project plans for Section 208 compliance and have done this for other towns. Ryan Bennett and Chris Miller July 29, 2021 Page 2 of 4 Proposed project(s) must be submitted to the Clean Water Trust for inclusion on the annual Intended Use Plan. If a project is included on the plan, it is then eligible for SRF funding. • Not all projects that request SRF funding are selected to be on the Intended Use Plan. 310 CMR 44.00 provides the criteria used to rank proposed projects. • In 2021, the Clean Water Trust funded 75% of the projects that applied for funding, providing $575,000,000 of the $977,000,000 that was requested. The projects are ranked on their ability to resolve current water quality issues for drinking water, freshwater ponds, and coastal waters. • To be eligible, Town funding to support the project must be secured no later than October of the year when funds are awarded. Funding from the Clean Water Trust Funding is provided as a 20-year loan with a maximum interest rate of 2%. Some projects can qualify for a lower interest rate as well. Projects that demonstrate that their implementation will not result in increased development in the area where the project takes place can qualify for a 0% interest rate. Funding from the CCIWPF The CCIWPF provides separate funds, as grants to the Towns that participate in the program. The funds are provided only for projects approved under the state’s Intended Use Plan. Each year the grants are provided based on the funds available and the number of projects eligible for funding. This data is used to select a subsidy percentage for each project. For the first round of funding through the CCIWPF, awards for projects on the Intended Use Plan were provided at a rate of 25% of the project cost. Small projects, below $1,000,000, are eligible for twice the percentage awarded to other projects. Awards for all projects are paid out in equal installments over 4 years after award. Proposed Projects in Brewster and Potential for SRF and CCIWPF Support HW considered the currently proposed projects under the IWRMP to evaluate their eligibility for receiving CCIWPF money and to estimate the expected amount of reimbursement that may be secured. Details are provided below. WWTP Planning, Design and Permitting. SRF funding for the planning and design of a neighborhood treatment facility to meet the Pleasant Bay TMDL and accommodate future buildout could be requested. This could also include the design of a septic upgrade for Captains Golf Course. Cost: $400,000 - $450,000 SRF Funding Eligibility Possible CCIWPF Eligibility Possible – At about 50% (double the standard percentage given the cost is below $1,000,000). Development of a Pilot Program for Septic Upgrades Near Freshwater Ponds. The project would select 1-3 different I/A systems that treat for phosphorus and design and install them on six properties within 300 feet of a pond. Phosphorus and nitrogen testing of the effluent would be conducted for 1-2 years to document their performance. Based on the results, a draft health regulation for ponds may be updated Ryan Bennett and Chris Miller July 29, 2021 Page 3 of 4 to require upgrades for systems within 300 feet upgradient and 100 feet downgradient of freshwater ponds. This could potentially be funded as a planning project. If the Clean Water Trust considers this a construction project, the types of I/A systems used may impact how the Trust ranks the project on the Intended Use Plan. Cost: $300,000 - $350,000 SRF Funding Eligibility Possible if this is considered a planning project – need to confirm. CCIWPF Eligibility Possible – At about 50% (double the standard percentage given the cost is below $1,000,000). Construction of a Neighborhood WWTP. The construction of a neighborhood treatment facility to reduce nitrogen loading in the Pleasant Bay watershed to meet the TMDL goals for existing development and from future buildout could be required, with the size of the facility based on the results of the ongoing Captains Golf Course study. It would include the building of the collection, treatment, and disposal facilities. Costs for any land acquisition or easements could potentially be included. This is eligible for SRF funding, and the selection of the project would depend on how it ranks relative to other projects when submitted. Achieving compliance with the Pleasant Bay TMDL would likely increase the project’s ranking. Cost: $10,000,000 - $15,000,000 (depends on system size and land acquisition costs) SRF Funding Eligibility Possible CCIWPF Eligibility Possible – likely at or around 25% ($2,500,000 - $3,750,000). The Town could consider a nitrogen trade with another Pleasant Bay watershed town, paying them to expand their wastewater treatment facility and thereby offset nitrogen loads generated in Brewster. Such a trade could reduce or eliminate the need for the neighborhood wastewater facility. The ability to have the cost of such a trade funded through the SRF program needs to be determined. Construction of Captains Golf Course I/A Treatment System. This project would involve the installation of an I/A treatment system into the existing septic system to treat nitrogen to 5 mg/L. Cost: $200,000 SRF Funding Eligibility Unclear. The use of an I/A system that does not have general use approval may not be approved for funding by the Clean Water Trust. Further discussion with them on this issue is needed. CCIWPF Eligibility Unlikely, unless the project is approved by the Clean Water Trust on the Intended Use Plan. Installation of I/A Septic Systems Adjacent to Fresh Water Ponds. The Town could help finance the upgrades of onsite systems within 300 feet upgradient and 100 feet downgradient of freshwater ponds. Town financing could cover the cost of the I/A system installation with the homeowner covering the costs of any other necessary septic system upgrades. Cost: $10,000,000 Ryan Bennett and Chris Miller July 29, 2021 Page 4 of 4 SRF Funding Eligibility Unclear. The use of an I/A system that does not have general use approval may not be approved for funding by the Clean Water Trust. Also, septic upgrades are typically funded through the Barnstable County Septic Loan Program. However, this is only available for systems considered failed under Title 5. Further discussion with the Trust and the Cape Cod Commission on these issues is needed. CCIWPF Eligibility Unlikely unless the project is approved by the Clean Water Trust on the Intended Use Plan. Initial Assessment of Funding from the CCIWPF Based on the information provided above, Brewster could potentially receive SRF funding, as one or more 20-year loans, for the planning projects and the construction of the neighborhood wastewater facility. A total of $10,700,000 to $15,800,000 could be funded. If awarded SRF funding, there would then be funds available from the CCIWPF to support the repayment of the SRF loans. Assuming a 25% payment of the cost of each project (and 50% for projects under $1,000,000 in cost) a total of $2,850,000 to $4,140,000 could be financed through the CCIWPF. Clarifying Questions to the Clean Water Trust Based on the review provided above, there are questions to discuss with the Clean Water Trust to help determine the likelihood of SRF funding for the projects under consideration in Brewster. These include: 1. Is the proposed pilot testing program for I/A septic systems near ponds eligible for SRF funding as a planning project or as an implementation project? 2. If the Town needs to acquire land to build a neighborhood wastewater facility, can that cost be funded under the SRF program? 3. Can Brewster receive CCIWPF money to support a nitrogen trade with another Town that is building an SRF eligible project, such as a traditional wastewater treatment facility? 4. Can projects involving the construction of I/A septic systems be eligible for SRF funding if the proposed technology has not received general use approval? Can this be done outside the Barnstable County Septic Loan Fund which only provides loans for septic upgrades that are deemed in failure under Title 5? 5. Can SRF funding be used for projects to upgrade septic systems on private properties not owned by the Town? It is our understanding that this has not been possible but that the state is reviewing this opportunity as it is eligible under federal SRF funding regulations. Charles D. Baker Governor Karyn E. Polito Lieutenant Governor Kathleen A. Theoharides Secretary Martin Suuberg Commissioner This information is available in alternate format. Contact Michelle Waters-Ekanem, Director of Diversity/Civil Rights at 617-292-5751. TTY# MassRelay Service 1-800-439-2370 MassDEP Website: www.mass.gov/dep Printed on Recycled Paper August 19, 2021 Mr. Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631 RE: Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Project Eligibility Dear Mr. Lombardi, Thank you for your letter dated August 2, 2021, and for meeting with staff from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) and staff from the Massachusetts Clean Water Trust (Trust) on August 17, 2021, to discuss CWSRF program eligibility. The town of Brewster (the Town) is considering a series of projects to improve water quality and to meet the nitrogen reduction needed for Pleasant Bay and numerous freshwater ponds as required under the watershed permit. Through your consultant’s (Horsley Witten Group) Memorandum dated July 29, 2021, you have presented conceptual projects and have posed a series of questions that we discussed at the meeting, summarized as follows: 1. Is the proposed pilot testing program for I/A septic systems near ponds eligible for SRF funding as a planning project or as an implementation project? Response: The conceptual pilot testing program for I/A septic systems near ponds would be eligible for SRF financing as a planning project. 2. If the Town needs to acquire land to build a neighborhood wastewater facility, can that cost be funded under the SRF program? Response: Only the portion of the property that is an integral part of land application treatment process is eligible for SRF financing. Eligibility would be considered as part of the construction phase of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Trust may be able to reimburse the Town for eligible costs of purchasing the land. 2 3. Can Brewster receive CCIWPF money to support a nitrogen trade with another Town that is building an SRF eligible project, such as a traditional wastewater treatment facility? Response: SRF financing is offered to the owner of the project. It is recommended that cost sharing be allocated through an Inter-Municipal Agreement. 4. Can projects involving the construction of I/A septic systems be eligible for SRF funding if the proposed technology has not received general use approval? Can this be done outside the Barnstable County Septic Loan Fund which only provides loans for septic upgrades that are deemed in failure under Title 5? Response: Implementation projects of I/A septic systems may be eligible for SRF financing, outside the Barnstable County Septic Loan Fund, if they have been evaluated and approved by MassDEP as part of a regional strategy or watershed permit, and if the SRF borrower is the Town. The level of reliance to achieve reduction targets is one of the items that will be assessed in review of how the proposed project fits in a regional strategy or watershed permit. For I/A septic system projects, a proposed plan from the Town for management and sampling is another aspect of the review. This is not an all-inclusive list of review items, but these are some key aspects to consider. 5. Can SRF funding be used for projects to upgrade septic systems on private properties not owned by the Town? It is our understanding that this has not been possible but that the state is reviewing this opportunity as it is eligible under federal SRF funding regulations Response: Septic system upgrades may be eligible for SRF financing if they have been recommended and approved by MassDEP as part of a regional strategy and if the SRF borrower is the Town. Please note, as discussed at our meeting, project design costs are not eligible for SRF financing. Please be advised that these responses are provided as general guidance, and they do not constitute final MassDEP determinations. MassDEP will determine SRF project eligibility upon review of a formal application following the established SRF process. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Maria E. Pinaud, Director Division of Municipal Services maria.pinaud@mass.gov Delivered via email. eCC: plombardi@brewster-ma.gov cmiller@brewster-ma.gov eperry@capecodcommission.org 3 eCC: mnelson@horsleywitten.com nkeenan@tre.state.ma.us andrew.osei@mass.gov ashraf.gabour@mass.gov Michele.Higgins@mass.gov brian.dudley@mass.gov Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Integrated Water Resource Management Planning 2022 Update Horsley Witten Group, Inc. All Water Resources are Interconnected Therefore: Horsley Witten Group, Inc. An Integrated Plan! Horsley Witten Group, Inc. The Big Picture… Protecting the Town’s Waters Protecting Public and Private Drinking Water Supplies Managing Nitrogen Loads to Coastal Embayments Protecting and Restoring Fresh Water Ponds Improving Stormwater Management Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Brewster’s Conservation Lands and Zone II Areas Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Coastal Watersheds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Status of Brewster’s Ponds - 2009 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Water Quality Issues - Nitrogen Impacts Drinking Water, Coastal Waters and Fresh Water Ponds SOURCES – Septic Systems, Fertilizers, Road Runoff Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Water Quality Issues - Nitrogen Septic System Discharge 35 mg/L Drinking Water Standard 10 mg/L State DW Planning Standard 5 mg/L Brewster Drinking Water < 1 mg/L Coastal Estuary Threshold ~0.3 mg/L Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Phosphorus and Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Water Quality Issues – Emerging Contaminants Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Found in Fire Fighting Foams, Cleaning Products Teflon Pans, Food Wrappers, Skin Care Products and Waterproof Clothing State Drinking Water Standard of 20 Parts Per Trillion Currently Not Detected in Brewster’s Public Wells Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Integrated Water Planning Timeline 2009 Comprehensive Water Planning Committee Formed Integrated Water Resources Management Plan Phase I - 2011 Phase II - 2012 Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Management Alternatives Assessment -2015 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Timeline - Continued Implementation Phase Water Resource Atlas – Fresh Water Ponds – 2016 Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit – 2018 Pleasant Bay Targeted Watershed Management Plan - 2018 Golf Course Fertilization/Leaching Rate Study – Ongoing Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Timeline - Continued Implementation Phase Walkers Pond Weed Harvesting Program Upper Mill Pond Alum Treatment Elbow Pond Weed Harvesting Program Ongoing Water Quality Assessments Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Key Issues in 2022 Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Management to Comply with Watershed Permit Development and Implementation of Strategies to Protect and Restore Fresh Water Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit Brewster makes up 25% of the Pleasant Bay Watershed and is accountable for 13% of the N load. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Open Space Purchases Protect Brewster’s Waters Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit Permit Signed in August 2018. Requires Brewster to remove of 2,262 kg of nitrogen per year and address future development. The town has already removed 56% of this load through changes in fertilizer practices at Captains Golf Course. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Nitrogen Reductions Achieved To Date Nitrogen Reduction Required:2,262 kg-N/year Approved Reductions in Watershed Permit: Golf Fertilizer Reduction (pre-2015) 930 kg-N/year Golf Irrigation Recapture 230 kg-N/year Town-wide Fertilizer Bylaw 121 kg-N/year Total Nitrogen Removed 1,281 kg-N/year Remaining Reduction Needed 981 kg/N/year Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Nitrogen Reductions by Watershed Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Nitrogen Impacts in Tar Kiln Subwatershed Currently Being Reevaluated Tar Kiln Watershed Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Nitrogen Management Alternatives to Meet Permit Goals Additional Captains Golf Course Fertilizer Management Neighborhood WWTP I/A Septic Treatment Systems Nitrogen Trading Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Further Nitrogen Reduction Opportunities at Captain’s Golf Course Reduce fertilizer applications on the fairways and roughs, incorporating sprayed applications of liquid fertilizers (underway). Potentially reduce the size of fairways by approximately 2.5 acres (course-wide) –subject to further discussion. Septic System Upgrade to Treat for Nitrogen (Cost approx. $150,000 -$170,000) Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Example of how a fairway could be shortened to reduce fertilizer applications Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Further Nitrogen Reduction Opportunities at Captain’s Golf Course Fertilizer Reductions -364 kg-N/year Fairway Changes -49 kg-N/year Septic Upgrade -45 kg-N/year Total New Reduction 458 kg-N/year Final Reduction Needed 523 kg/N/year Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation •Changes in fertilizer practices may mean that less nitrogen is leaching into groundwater. •The permit assumes that 20% does leach. •Documenting a lower leaching rate would further reduce Brewster’s obligations under the permit. •Study underway to document how much nitrogen enters groundwater from fertilizer applications. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation Six fairway sites being tested using subsurface lysimeters and groundwater monitoring wells Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation •Results of this study – completed in 2023 - will determine what additional nitrogen load must be managed using other techniques Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Neighborhood Wastewater Treatment and Collection System Disposal in the watershed Disposal outside the watershed Number of Homes = 152 Number of Homes = 110 Nitrogen reduction ~ 523 kg/yr Nitrogen reduction ~ 523 kg/yr 20-year cost = $10,000,000 - $15,000,000 20-year cost = $9,000,000 •A traditional wastewater system could be installed in the upper portion of the watershed to treat effluent prior to its discharge to groundwater. •Can offset future development Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Option 3: Onsite Septic System Treatment Upgrades Septic systems serving individual properties could be upgraded to provide additional nitrogen treatment. On-site septic system treatment upgrades have until recently been recently been the preferred alternative. Through the PB Watershed Permit and supporting SNEP Grant, this approach appears to be less cost effective for this watershed at this scale. Number of Homes = 320 Nitrogen reduction = 523 kg/yr 20-year cost = $26,000,000 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Nitrogen Trading •The permit allows the town to negotiate a “nitrogen trade” with another Pleasant Bay town. •Eliminates the long-term management of a facility in Brewster. •Size and cost of the trade could be adjusted to accommodate future nitrogen impacts from buildout. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Summary 75% of Brewster’s obligations can be achieved at Captains Golf Course with Minimal Cost. A successful study of leaching rates will further reduce the town’s obligation. Options to manage the rest includes: Neighborhood WWTP Onsite Septic Upgrades Nitrogen Trade Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Ongoing Pond Restoration Activities Walkers Pond – Weed harvesting to remove plants and associated phosphorus. Water quality continues to deteriorate and further study by SMAST is underway Upper Mill Pond – Alum Treatment to minimize phosphorus input from pond sediments Elbow Pond weed harvesting Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Ongoing Water Quality Testing Annual testing of 28 ponds across Brewster Last update report on testing published in 2009 New update would be useful Estimated cost - $50,000 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Septic Management Near Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Septic Management Near Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Current Regulation Proposed Regulation Pond Nutrient Management Areas Nutrient Management Area for Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Water Resource Atlas - Fresh Water Ponds Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Draft Health Reg for Ponds Reset septic buffer 300 feet upgradient 100 feet downgradient Require phosphorus treatment units or shallow leach fields to capture phosphorus in iron rich soils Require nitrogen treatment as well Horsley Witten Group, Inc. How Many Properties Affected? Estimate up to 600 Homes Would Require an Upgrade Total Cost at $20,000-$25,000 per Property = $12,000,000 to $15,000,000 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Pilot Project Proposed Installing and Testing I/A Septic Systems for Phosphorus and Nitrogen Treatment Would Answer Many Implementation and Performance Questions. Estimate Pilot Cost - $300,000 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Financing – Who Pays? Town’s Contribution? Property Owner’s Contribution? Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Potential Financing Options State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loans at Low or 0% Interest for Eligible Projects Barnstable County Septic System Loan Program Cape and Islands Water Protection Fund Local Funding Alternative Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Cost Summary – Pleasant Bay Golf Course Design Refinements $20,000 Captains I/A Septic System $200,000 WWTP Planning $200,000 - $225,000 Design and Permitting $200,000 - $225,000 Construction 10,000,000 - $15,000,000 A lower fertilizer leaching rate at Captains Golf Course will reduce these costs. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Cost Summary – Fresh Water Ponds Pond WQ Update Report $50,000 Pilot Septic Program $300,000 - $350,000 I/A Systems $12,000,000 - $15,000,000 Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Cost Summary – Total Total Cost:$22,970,000 - $31,070,000 Total SRF Funding $10,750,000 - $15,825,000 Total CCIWPF $2,875,000 - $4,162,500 Local Funding up to $1,000,000/year Horsley Witten Group, Inc. Questions? Integrated Water Resource Management Plan 2022 Update Town of Brewster Brewster Town Hall 2198 Main Street Brewster, Massachusetts 02631 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 2 Overview of Water Quality in Brewster ........................................................................................ 3 Brewster’s Public Drinking Water Supply .................................................................................. 4 Pleasant Bay Watershed ........................................................................................................... 5 Herring River and Bass River Watersheds ................................................................................. 5 Other Coastal Estuaries ............................................................................................................. 5 Fresh Water Ponds .................................................................................................................... 6 IWRMP Summary .......................................................................................................................... 6 Implementation of the IWRMP ..................................................................................................... 7 Pleasant Bay Watershed ........................................................................................................... 8 Golf Course Fertilizer and Wastewater Management ............................................................... 9 Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation ...................................................................... 10 Install a Neighborhood Wastewater Treatment and Collection System .................................. 10 Onsite Septic System Treatment Upgrades ............................................................................. 11 Nitrogen Trading ..................................................................................................................... 11 Buildout Nitrogen Management ............................................................................................. 12 Fresh Water Ponds .................................................................................................................. 13 Stormwater Management ....................................................................................................... 15 Herring River Watershed ......................................................................................................... 16 Summary of Potential Costs & Funding Sources ......................................................................... 16 Conclusions – Summary of Next Steps ........................................................................................ 17 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 18 2 BREWSTER’S INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN - 2022 UPDATE Introduction Since the 1980’s, Brewster has actively focused on protecting and restoring the Town’s water resources. This includes significant investments to protect undeveloped land to prevent the pollution of groundwater and surface waters associated with residential and commercial development. In 2009, the Town of Brewster began a detailed study (known as the Integrated Water Resource Management Plan or IWRMP) to identify the issues associated with the Town’s water systems and propose strategies to protect and restore water quality. This planning process led to a series of recommendations related to groundwater, freshwater ponds, stormwater management and coastal estuaries, with a focus on Pleasant Bay. In the last 10 years, significant work has been done to advance these recommendations. The purpose of this updated report is to summarize the goals of the Town’s planning process, describe the actions that have been taken to date and present the current plans for continued water management in Brewster, including the costs needed to implement these plans. As will be described throughout this report, the Town’s investments in protecting open space have preserved drinking water quality throughout Brewster and have significantly reduced the future investments needed to restore the quality of freshwater ponds as well as Pleasant Bay and other coastal estuaries. Integrated Water Resource Management Groundwater and surface waters, throughout Brewster, are interconnected. Rainfall is the source of Brewster’s groundwater and surface waters. Rainwater lands on the ground surface and either infiltrates through the soil into groundwater or flows over the ground surface to a freshwater pond, Cape Cod Bay or one of the coastal estuaries in or near Brewster. These interrelationships led to the decision to develop the IWRMP to evaluate the quality of the groundwater that provides drinking water to Brewster’s residents, as well as the quality of the Town’s many freshwater ponds and coastal estuaries. This planning process recognized that individual plans or actions are needed for specific watersheds in town; those areas that contribute groundwater or surface water to freshwater ponds, or coastal estuaries (Figure 1). The IWRMP process also recognizes ongoing planning is needed for those areas that contribute groundwater to the Town’s public drinking water wells. These areas are known in Massachusetts as Zone II’s, or wellhead protection areas, and are shown in Figure 2. In £¤6 UV137UV124 UV6A DENNIS HARWIC H YARMOUTH ORLEANS CHATHAM Cape Co d Bay Stony BrookQuivett Creek Ple asa nt Bay Bass River Herring River Namskaket Swan Pond Little Namskaket Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community / 0 10.5 Miles Date: 1/18/2022 Path: H:\Projects\2011\11109 Brewster Int.Wtr.Res.Mgt Plan\GIS\Maps\Report\Figure B-2.mxd Figure 1. Brewster's Water Reso urces C apeC odB ayP l e a s a n t B a y Cape Cod Bay Legend Ponds Streams Subwatersheds Wetlands Town of Brewster Watersheds !A !A !A !A !A !A UV6A £¤6 UV137 UV124 WELL # 6 WELL #5 WELL # 4 WELL # 1 WELL # 2 WELL # 3 DENNIS HARWICH ORLEAN S CHATHAMYARMOUTH / 0 10.5 Miles Date: 1/26/2022 Path: H:\Projects\2011\11109 Brewster Int.Wtr.Res.Mgt Plan\GIS\Maps\Report\Figure 2.mxd Figure 2. Brewster Conservation Lan ds and Zone II Are as C apeC odB ayPleasantBayCape Cod Bay !A Publi c Wells Legend Conservation Lands Ponds Brewter Zone II Town of Brewster Other Zone II 3 addition, the areas contributing groundwater and surface water to freshwater ponds must also be assessed and the sources of pollution to these ponds managed. The interrelationships between groundwater, surface water and different sources of pollutants can be seen in Figure 3. The graphic shows how day-to-day activities of town residents impact the quality of drinking water and the quality of freshwater ponds and coastal estuaries. What is flushed down a toilet into a septic system can impact water quality in downgradient wells, ponds or coastal estuaries. Pollutants on town roadways (e.g., automobiles, fertilizers, and pet wastes) are collected in stormwater runoff that flows into waterways or soaks into the ground and impacts groundwater quality. Figure 3 – Integrated Connections Between Water Resources and Pollutants Overview of Water Quality in Brewster Brewster is fortunate to have a public water system that provides high quality drinking water. However, there are ongoing issues with the water quality in many of the freshwater ponds in town, in Pleasant Bay and in Herring River in the adjacent town of Harwich. While Brewster only has frontage on a small portion of Pleasant Bay, and none on the Herring River, a portion of the watersheds that contribute pollutants to them are located in Brewster and the Town has a regulatory obligation to manage these watersheds. An overview of the regulatory requirements for managing the Town’s water resources, and the protection and restoration strategies the Town is currently evaluating, are summarized below. The status of the Town’s actions to restore these waters is then discussed in the following report sections. 4 Brewster’s Public Drinking Water Supply Most Brewster residents get their drinking water from the Town’s public water supply system. Brewster’s public water supply provides high quality drinking water pumped from six wells withdrawing groundwater from the area surrounding each well. The Zone II protection areas to these wells are shown on Figure 2. The protection of undeveloped open space around the Town’s wells serves to minimize the potential for contaminants to impact drinking water quality. In 2012, 40% of the Town’s Zone II areas were protected open space (See IWRMP Phase II Report). The extent of protected open space has grown since then, with further acquisitions by the Town and the Brewster Conservation Trust. Public supply wells using groundwater are typically threatened by nitrogen from septic systems, lawn fertilizers, road runoff, hazardous material releases from fuel storage tanks, and accidental spills from roadway accidents. The open space protection in Brewster has significantly reduced the number of onsite septic systems potentially affecting drinking water quality. The Town’s Water Quality Review Bylaw also prohibits hazardous materials use, or storage at volumes above those typically used in a household, in the Zone II areas. The Town’s wells are tested regularly, and the tests confirm there are no contaminants exceeding federal and state drinking water standards. This data is reported annually in the Consumer Confidence Report, which the Water Department is required to produce. As can be seen in the 2020 report (Town of Brewster Water Department, June 2021), the nitrogen concentration in the Town’s drinking water averaged less than 1 part per million (mg/L). The drinking water standard for nitrogen is 10 mg/L. Nitrogen is an indicator of contamination from septic systems, fertilizers and runoff. The low value is reflective of the extent of protected open space in the Zone II areas around the town wells. Emerging contaminants are an ongoing concern for every drinking water system. One of the emerging contaminants of concern for many drinking water systems is per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). PFAS compounds are found in firefighting foams, a variety of personal care products, food wrappings, Teflon coated cookware, and clothing. The recently updated state drinking water standard for six of these PFAS compounds is now 20 parts per trillion. Note, this drinking water standard is six orders of magnitude lower than the standard for nitrogen. Small releases of these compounds to soil and groundwater can create issues for public water systems, so ongoing testing and evaluation is needed. Tests conducted in 2021 showed no PFAS compounds have been detected in the Town’s public water supplies. There are properties in Brewster that use private wells for drinking water, and they are located in various locations across the Town. These wells face the same water quality issues as the Town wells and often also benefit from nearby protected open space. One issue with private wells is their placement relative to an onsite septic system on the same property or an abutting property. Even if a septic system is outside the required 100-foot setback from a private well, if groundwater is flowing from the septic system towards the well it can bring nitrogen and other contaminants to the well. For this reason, it is important for residents to test the water quality in their private wells on a regular basis. 5 Pleasant Bay Watershed The majority of the IWRMP implementation work over the last four years has focused on Brewster’s portion of the Pleasant Bay watershed. Nitrogen inputs from the land uses within the watershed that contributes groundwater to the bay is the major water quality concern. Excess concentrations accelerate the growth of algae and invasive plants leading to the loss of fish and shellfish habitat. A main concern is the loss of eelgrass that provides habitat for fish to lay eggs and threatens protection of bay scallops. Brewster occupies approximately 25% of the overall watershed shared by Orleans, Harwich, and Chatham, but only contributes to 13% of the total nitrogen load entering the Bay. Brewster still needs to reduce its load by 981 kg/year and has agreed to do this under the Watershed Permit issued by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to the four Pleasant Bay Towns. Herring River and Bass River Watersheds Portions of the watersheds to Herring River in Harwich and Bass River in Dennis and Yarmouth are located in Brewster. Like Pleasant Bay, nitrogen is the pollutant of concern for these estuaries. Brewster’s portion of the Bass River Watershed is quite small, at 160 acres (Univ of MA Dartmouth, April 2011). Given this small area and the fact most of the watershed land within Brewster is protected open space there are no nitrogen management requirements for this watershed. For the Herring River watershed there is likewise no need to reduce the existing nitrogen load within Brewster. However, any additional load resulting from new development in the watershed will need to be managed to minimize the extent of additional nitrogen entering the Herring River system (Univ of MA Dartmouth, May 2013). Recent open space acquisitions in the watershed have reduced the potential for additional nitrogen impacts and the Town will be updating the quantity of nitrogen that needs to be managed in this watershed in the future. Other Coastal Estuaries Nitrogen management for the Namskaket Creek and Quivett Creek watersheds has also been evaluated in Brewster. These estuaries are located on the north shore of Brewster and drain into Cape Cod Bay. Namskaket Creek is different from the estuaries discussed above as the current and future nitrogen load to this estuary is lower than the threshold established by DEP. So, there is no current need to develop a management plan for this system (Univ of MA Dartmouth, December 2008). The Quivett Creek watershed was evaluated by the Cape Cod Commission (October 2018), and it determined there is no need for nitrogen management at this time. Recent data for Quivett Creek developed by the Association to Preserve Cape Cod (APCC) is currently being reviewed by the Brewster Natural Resource Advisory Commission to determine if water quality has changed. The tidal range in Cape Cod Bay and within these 6 estuaries is much higher than in Pleasant Bay, Herring River or Bass River. Therefore, nitrogen entering these systems is quickly flushed out into Cape Cod Bay and does not have the same impact on the health of the estuaries. Fresh Water Ponds Brewster is home to over 80 freshwater ponds located throughout the Town. Unlike coastal waters, pond water quality is impacted by both phosphorus and nitrogen. Excess inputs of these nutrients fuel the growth of algae which, when they die and decay, reduce the oxygen level in the water. Fish kills can result if algae blooms get too big and result in anoxic conditions in the water. In addition, the mixture of nitrogen and phosphorus can promote the growth of toxic organisms like cyanobacteria which were found in three ponds in the summer of 2021 based on testing conducted by APCC. Warmer temperatures and drought conditions over the last year have extended the growing season in the ponds, exacerbating some of these water quality issues. Many ponds are experiencing water quality impairment as shown in Figure 4. The main sources of these nutrients to ponds are septic systems, lawn fertilizers and road runoff. Since phosphorus does not travel extensive distances in groundwater, the concern with septic system discharges is only related to those within approximately 300 feet of the pond shore, especially on the upgradient side of the pond, as mapped on the Water Resource Atlas described later in this report. IWRMP Summary As mentioned above, Brewster’s IWRMP development began in 2009. Since then, a series of reports specific to Brewster have been prepared to outline specific water quality issues and recommend actions to address them. The majority of them can be viewed on the Town’s Website at www.brewster-ma.gov (click on the Water Planning button on the home page). A summary of the main reports that continue to direct the IWRMP process is provided below. • Integrated Water Resource Management Plan Phase II Report, January 2013. This report provided a review of the regulatory process governing water quality management in Brewster and made specific recommendations for restoring and protecting water quality for drinking water, freshwater ponds and coastal estuaries. • Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Management Alternatives Analysis Report, March 2015. This report focused on strategies to reduce nitrogen loading from Brewster’s portion of the Pleasant Bay Watershed to help achieve the nitrogen reduction goals to restore water quality in the Bay. The alternatives considered included a neighborhood sewer system, changes in fertilization practices at the Captain’s Golf Course, the use of innovative septic treatment systems and other potential solutions. • Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit and Targeted Watershed Management Plan, 2018. Brewster entered into an agreement with the DEP and the three other Pleasant Bay £¤6 UV137 UV124 UV6A Long Pond Cliff Pond Upper Mill Pond Seym our Pond Sheep Pond Walkers Pond Flax P ond Low er Mill Pond Elbow Pond Slough Pond Cahoon Pond Griffiths P ond Bakers Pond Greenland Pond Pine Pond Little Cliff Pond Higgins Pond Cobbs Pond Mill PondSmalls Pond Blueberry Pond Canoe Pond Grassy PondMud Pond Smith Pond Black P ond Sols Pond Owl PondMyricks Pond Eel PondSchoolhouse Pond Round Pond Lees Pond Widger Hole No Bottom Pond HARWIC H ORLEANS DENNIS CHATHAM / 0 10.5 Miles Path: H:\Projects\2011\11109 Brewster Int.Wtr.Res.Mgt Plan\GIS\Maps\Report\Figure 1_20171002.mxd Figure 4. Water Quality in Brewste r's Po nds C apeC odB ayPleasantB ayCape Cod Bay Legend Ponds Town of Brewster Ponds Health Assessment Water Q uality Category 1 - High Quality 2 - Meets Most Uses 3 - Some Im pairment 4 - ImpairedMassDOT Major Roads Wetlands No Data Date: 1/14/2022 7 Watershed towns to restore water quality in Pleasant Bay (DEP, August 2018). The Permit specifies specific requirements to reduce nitrogen loading to the bay. The Pleasant Bay Alliance prepared a companion report, the Targeted Watershed Management Plan, outlining the strategies proposed by each town to meet the nitrogen reduction goals in the Permit. (Pleasant Bay Alliance, March 2018) • Meeting the Nitrogen Reduction Goals for Pleasant Bay, October 2020. This report provides an update to the Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Management Alternatives Analysis Report mentioned above. The update was prepared for the Select Board and incorporates updated information on the nitrogen management alternatives available to Brewster based on the requirements of the DEP Permit issued in 2018. • Mill Ponds Management Plan, November 2014. This report, prepared by the School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST) at the University of Massachusetts, provided recommendations for the restoration of Upper Mill, Lower Mill and Walkers Pond. Based on these recommendations, the Town purchased a weed harvester to help manage Walkers Pond. They also conducted an alum treatment in Upper Mill Pond to reduce water quality impacts from phosphorus historically discharged to the pond, which is now contained in the sediment on the pond bottom. • Water Resource Atlas – Fresh Water Ponds. This Atlas provide maps of the surface watersheds and groundwater recharge areas to each pond in Brewster, and provides the areas proposed for additional septic system management within 300 feet on the upgradient side of each pond, and 100 feet on the downgradient side of the pond. Additional reports have been prepared as part of the Massachusetts Estuaries Project and on behalf of the Pleasant Bay Alliance and these are referenced in the following section of this report. Implementation of the IWRMP The Town’s actions to implement recommendations in the IWRMP are currently focused on the following topics: • Nitrogen reduction in the Pleasant Bay Watershed, as required in the watershed permit issued by DEP. • Actions to protect and restore water quality in the Town’s freshwater ponds. • Implementation of the recently adopted stormwater management bylaw to protect water quality. • Plans to reduce future nitrogen loading in the Herring River watershed. An update on the status of each of these topics is provided below, summarizing the actions being considered, the associated costs, and the work needed to make final decisions. 8 Pleasant Bay Watershed Brewster has collaborated on managing nitrogen in Pleasant Bay with the other towns in the watershed through the Pleasant Bay Alliance. This has included documenting the nitrogen removal responsibilities for each town and establishing the Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit with DEP that provides a framework to meet these nitrogen reduction goals over a 20-year period. The details of these plans are summarized in the Pleasant Bay Targeted Watershed Management Plan, prepared by the Alliance and referenced in the DEP Permit. Much of the data in this plan was obtained from the 2006 Linked Watershed Model, developed by SMAST, as part of the Massachusetts Estuaries Program (Univ of MA Dartmouth, May 2006). It documents the existing nitrogen loading from each town, divided up by the watersheds contributing groundwater to the Bay. It then establishes the nitrogen reduction requirements for each town in each watershed. The Permit requires Brewster to remove of 2,262 kg N/year from the watershed and to address nitrogen impacts from future development. At the time it was issued, the Town had already removed 56% of this load, taking advantage of fertilizer and irrigation management at Captains Golf Course as well as the adoption of a town-wide fertilizer management bylaw (Table -1). This was done with minimal cost to the Town. Total Nitrogen Reduction Required 2,262 kg N/year Golf Fertilization Reduction -930 kg N/year Golf Irrigation Recapture -230 kg N/year Town-wide Fertilizer Bylaw -121 kg N/year Total Nitrogen Removed to Date -1,281 kg N/year Remaining Reduction Needed 981 kg/N/year Table -1 Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Load Summary The permit also requires that the Town address nitrogen inputs from future development in the watershed. Based on an assessment in 2018 (HW, April 2018), this could include an additional 1,209 kg N/year. The Pleasant Bay Alliance will be working over the next year to update this buildout number to assist with the planning needed to manage this additional load. Any future load created will have to be offset by further reductions in existing loads. The Pleasant Bay Alliance is currently working with SMAST to evaluate and revise the nitrogen reduction requirements for each Town based on updated land use information since the initial report was prepared in 2006 and considering the changes in hydrology in Pleasant Bay given the new inlet that was formed in 2007 that increases the tidal flushing in the estuary. The extent of nitrogen entering Pleasant Bay from the Tar Kiln portion of the watershed is currently being reviewed and is an important issue for the Town. If groundwater containing 9 nitrogen enters a freshwater pond or wetland, some of the nitrogen is attenuated, or taken up by the algae and plants, and less is transferred back into groundwater which then flows to Pleasant Bay. No attenuation was attributed to the Tar Kiln watershed in the initial SMAST Model, but recent studies by SMAST led them to conclude that there is attenuation in this marsh system. As such, the existing nitrogen impact from this watershed is reduced, meaning that septic systems, lawns and stormwater in this area of the watershed do not have as much impact on Pleasant Bay. However, a portion of Captains Golf Course lies in this watershed, and the plans for managing further nitrogen reductions may be somewhat offset by the new attenuation attributed to the Tar Kiln Marsh. The Town is working with the Pleasant Bay Alliance to quantify how this affects Brewster’s requirements under the Watershed Permit. However, the effects should not be significant enough to require major changes in the plans developed to date. The options to fully comply with the Watershed Permit are summarized below. One major opportunity is continued fertilizer management at Captains Golf Course. The extent to which this will reduce nitrogen loading will affect the scale and cost of the other options the Town is considering. Each option is discussed below, with an initial estimate of the cost for implementation. Golf Course Fertilizer and Wastewater Management In 2020, the Town has collaborated with the U.S. Golf Association to identify additional strategies to further reduce nitrogen inputs at Captains Golf Course. Proposed changes at the golf course include: • Changes in fertilization practices to reduce applications on the fairways and roughs, incorporating sprayed applications of liquid fertilizers that can be readily adsorbed by the turf. These new practices began in 2020. • Reductions in the size of fairways by a total of approximately 2.5 acres by converting this turf to rough and reducing fertilizer demand. The areas selected are based on an inspection by the U.S. Golf Association and would not hinder the way the course is used. • Installation of a nitrogen treatment system to the septic system at the course that would reduce the nitrogen concentration in the effluent to 10 mg/L or less. If implemented, these actions would further reduce nitrogen loading by 458 kg/year, such that the Town will only need to manage the remaining current nitrogen load of 523 kg/year. There would be little to no cost for changes in fertilization applications, the cost for the adjustments to the size of the fairways would cost about $20,000 and the septic system upgrades would cost approximately $200,000. The golf course has already begun to implement the sprayed applications of fertilizer at reduced rates and this process will continue moving forward. Nitrogen Reduction 458 kg/year Estimated Cost $220,000 – Current Estimate 10 Golf Course Fertilizer Leaching Rate Evaluation Separate from the reduced amount of fertilizer applied to the golf course turf, the Town could receive a nitrogen reduction credit related to the amount of fertilizer that actually leaches into groundwater and flows to Pleasant Bay. Currently the DEP watershed permit assumes that 20% of the nitrogen in fertilizers leaches into groundwater. The proposed management practices will likely reduce this leaching rate. If so, additional nitrogen reduction credits can be obtained. The Town has begun a study to evaluate the fertilizer leaching rate that involves the testing of water in the soil and the underlying groundwater for nitrogen. A series of six lysimeters have been installed in the golf course fairways that capture water infiltrating through the upper 1-2 feet of soil. Six monitoring wells located near the lysimeters have also been installed. Quarterly testing of nitrogen concentrations will be conducted for two years to document how much nitrogen applied in fertilizer actually enters groundwater below the golf course. Based on this data, an updated leaching rate for fertilizers will be documented and used to determine the remaining nitrogen load that must be managed by Brewster. This option is attractive because the only expense is the cost for a study to document this leaching rate. If the leaching rate is substantially lower, the nitrogen reduction requirements for both existing and future loads could be reduced. Nitrogen Reduction To be determined Cost (for leaching rate study) $140,000 – funded in 2021 and underway Install a Neighborhood Wastewater Treatment and Collection System A traditional wastewater system could be installed in the upper, western portion of the watershed to treat effluent prior to its discharge to groundwater. This area was selected based on the concentration of development that reduces the length, and therefore the cost, of sewer lines needed to collect wastewater. There are two options for this, either site the wastewater disposal field in the watershed or locate it outside the watershed. If the disposal field is not within the watershed, all the nitrogen from the homes connected to the system is removed, and therefore fewer homes need to be connected to reach the required nitrogen load reduction. The siting of a disposal field outside the Pleasant Bay watershed needs to account of other potential impacts to drinking water supplies or other sensitive watersheds. The sizing of the system assumes no change in the golf course leaching rate. Both of these options could be expanded to accommodate additional nitrogen from future development. The costs listed below are broken out into those needed to design and permit the system and those needed for construction and a long term (20-year) operation. Disposal in the watershed Disposal outside the watershed 11 No. of Homes 152 No. of Homes 100 Nitrogen removed 523 kg/yr. Nitrogen reduction 523 kg/yr. Planning Cost $450,000 Planning Cost $400,000 20-year cost $10,000,000-$15,000,000 20-year cost $9,000,000 Onsite Septic System Treatment Upgrades Septic systems serving individual properties could be upgraded to provide additional nitrogen treatment. Currently, it may be possible to utilize an innovative treatment system to treat nitrogen to about 12 mg/L, well below the typical system which discharges nitrogen at a concentration of about 35 mg/L. There are innovative systems that could meet this goal, but they are still being evaluated. Based on the best, currently available data, approximately 320 septic systems would need to be upgraded to this relatively new technology to provide the necessary nitrogen reduction. This number may change based on the results from the golf course leaching rate study and the nitrogen attenuation attributed to the Tar Kiln Marsh watershed. More septic systems could be upgraded with nitrogen treatment to help accommodate future nitrogen loads from buildout. The Pleasant Bay Alliance evaluated the cost for the design, construction and long-term operation of these systems and reported that the price for an individual system could run as high as $33,900 with annual operation and maintenance costs of $2,360 (HW, 2020, Appendix C). Over 20 years this results in a total cost for 320 properties of $26,000,000. This cost makes this option more expensive than the neighborhood system described above. The Town is continuing to evaluate these costs, based in part on a pilot program led by the Barnstable Clean Water Coalition documenting actual construction costs for 15-20 systems which are somewhat lower than that estimated by the Alliance. The use of these systems could be beneficial if the leaching rate study at the golf course shows fewer of them are needed. They may also be useful for managing future development not just in the Pleasant Bay watershed but in watersheds adjacent to freshwater ponds as well. No. of Homes 320 Nitrogen reduction 523 kg/yr. 20-year cost $26,000,000 Nitrogen Trading The Town can negotiate a “nitrogen trade” with another Pleasant Bay town by financing nitrogen removal actions they are taking. As an example, if a neighborhood treatment plant would cost $10,000,000 to remove 523 kg N/year, the Town could negotiate an agreement with Harwich, Orleans, or Chatham to fund wastewater treatment in their community to remove the same amount of nitrogen, taking advantage of economies of scale and excess nitrogen removal in their new wastewater systems. The size and cost of the trade could be adjusted to accommodate future nitrogen impacts from buildout. This would eliminate the long-term management of a facility in Brewster. 12 Buildout Nitrogen Management Under the Watershed Permit, Brewster needs to develop a plan to ensure future development is managed to keep the nitrogen loading in the Town’s portion of the watershed within the levels allowed for Pleasant Bay. Part of this can be accomplished through the strategies discussed above. In addition, there are regulatory options that the Town can evaluate to make sure that the loading from future development is minimized to the extent possible. The Water Quality Review Bylaw currently in place limits the amount of nitrogen from development within the Pleasant Bay watershed. For any new project, or for an expansion of an existing development, the applicant must demonstrate the overall nitrogen load is limited to an average of 5 mg/L in groundwater underneath the site. Several changes to this bylaw were approved by Town Meeting in November 2021 and the Board of Health recently approved related nitrogen loading calculation regulations pending town counsel review. This 5 mg/L limit applies to both residential properties and to commercial/industrial areas also located within the Pleasant Bay watershed. The Town is considering changing the 5mg/L limit for commercial and industrial properties to 3 mg/L. If this change is made, the overall nitrogen load from buildout is reduced by 25-30% in this watershed. New data from the Pleasant Bay Alliance’s ongoing buildout assessment will refine the actual benefit of this change. Preliminary calculations suggest that most commercial/industrial uses allowed in the watershed could comply with the 3 mg/L threshold. If not, a project may need to install an innovative septic system technology to treat nitrogen in wastewater effluent to meet this goal. Given any new development increases the overall nitrogen management load, it is worthwhile to consider having some limitations on the extent of additional load that could be allowed. Other buildout options include limiting the extent of development allowed on town-owned properties within the watershed and further limiting the allowable nitrogen load from residential properties. Further discussion and public input are needed on these options. These discussions will benefit from the ongoing collection of data from the golf course study discussed above. In summary, there are several viable options to fully comply with Brewster’s obligations under the Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit. The proposed leaching rate study will document potential additional nitrogen reductions at the golf course with minimal cost. This would further reduce the costs for the remaining actions the town will have to take. The neighborhood wastewater treatment options could be used to manage the remaining nitrogen or as a basis for a nitrogen trade with another Pleasant Bay town. Each of these options can also be expanded, if needed, to accommodate future development. The Town is required to provide annual updates to DEP under the Watershed Permit and coordinates these updates with the other Pleasant Bay Towns. The Cape Cod Commission also reviews ongoing work in the watershed as part of its 13 implementation of the Section 208 Area Wide Water Quality Management Plan. Its most recent review is provided in Appendix A. Fresh Water Ponds As discussed above, if too much phosphorus enters a pond, it will accelerate the growth of algae. When algae dies it decays, and as this happens the oxygen in the water column is depleted. In extreme situations, this results in fish kills as there is not enough oxygen to keep the fish alive. Phosphorus does not travel far in groundwater as it readily binds to the iron and manganese in the subsurface soils and sediments. This means that, for phosphorus, the primary concerns with septic systems are those located within 300 feet of a pond on the upgradient side where groundwater is traveling towards the pond. Recent studies have shown that nitrogen is also a concern in ponds, as the combination of nitrogen and phosphorus can create conditions that support the growth of cyanobacteria, a toxic organism that can affect people and wildlife. Water Quality Data The Town has conducted regular water quality monitoring of many of the larger ponds in Brewster and used that information to support restoration projects in Long Pond, Walkers Pond, and Upper Mill Pond. A summary of this water quality data was last published in 2009. An update on the current water quality status based on the data collected since 2009 would be useful and the Town is working to review ongoing monitoring data and develop a new status report. The cost for this update report is estimated at $50,000. It should be noted that bacteria testing of pond water quality is also conducted by the Board of Health monitoring water quality at the public beaches at ponds in Town. Board of Health Septic Regulations The Board of Health currently has a regulation prohibiting septic system leaching facilities within 300 feet of a pond. This serves to minimize phosphorus impacts from future development. However, there are approximately 600 properties either fully or partially within the 300-foot buffer to the ponds in Brewster. Applicants looking to update or expand their septic system are regularly asking for a variance to this regulation as they cannot move their leaching facility outside the 300-foot buffer. HW prepared a draft revision to this Board of Health regulation in 2016. The draft requires septic systems within 300 feet upgradient and 100 feet downgradient of a pond to install a leaching facility or alternative technology that will provide phosphorus treatment. This regulation was discussed at a public Board of Health Hearing in 2016. There were questions related to the cost of the treatment systems and the performance of the technologies available at that time for phosphorus treatment. Further evaluation of the draft regulation is needed to advance the process to restore pond water quality. In part, it needs to consider the treatment for nitrogen as well as phosphorus given concerns about cyanobacteria. Along with evaluating 14 the technologies available, it will be important to consider the cost of implementing a new regulation and the process for funding it. Innovative/Alternative Septic Pilot Program In 2018, a charrette was held with members of the Board of Health, Town staff, local design engineers and a representative from the MA Septic System Test Center to evaluate the proposed phosphorus treatment technologies then available and associated costs. The installation of pilot systems within 300 feet of one or more ponds in Brewster to test the technology and document the costs was recommended at each session. Newer technologies are now being tested to document their performance for treating both nutrients and these could be incorporated into a pilot project in Brewster. A pilot project testing 6 innovative septic systems would cost approximately $300,000. Based on recent work conducted in the Shubael Pond neighborhood by the Barnstable Clean Water Coalition (December 2021), the cost to design, permit and install an alternative treatment system is approximately $20,000-$25,000. Note, this cost is lower than the estimate for similar systems developed by the Pleasant Bay Alliance. This is in part due to the need for a greater amount of monitoring of the systems under the Pleasant Bay Permit. The cost for each site will vary based on the size of the property, the slope of the land and the operational status of the existing septic tank and leaching facility (if they can be maintained). There may be more affordable technologies, but this provides an initial estimate for implementing this regulation. Large-Scale Innovative/Alternative Septic Upgrades The overall cost if all 600 properties within the proposed setback to ponds were upgraded would be approximately $12,000,000 to $15,000,000. There would also be annual operation, maintenance and monitoring fees for these systems. Further discussion on who should pay for some or all of these upgrades is needed. Not all ponds in Brewster are accessible by the public, as the shoreline at some locations is all privately owned. A question that has been raised is whether the town should provide funding for system upgrades if there is no public access. The next steps for implementing actions for ponds include: • Updating information available on the technologies that can provide phosphorus and nitrogen treatment, including their performance and cost. • Revising the draft health regulation. • Evaluating other sources of nutrient pollution to ponds and develop strategies to minimize these threats. As discussed below, the stormwater bylaw adopted in November 2021 will help with pond water quality management. Additional outreach and public discussion will be needed to achieve consensus on the best approach for pond management. 15 Neighborhood Sewer Systems It should be noted that there was discussion about providing neighborhood sewer systems around ponds in Brewster at the public meeting in 2016 and at the charrette in 2018. This option seems to be significantly more costly than using individual onsite systems. It would not be feasible to construct one system to sewer all the areas around Brewster’s ponds. There would be a need to construct sewer lines around each pond as well as multiple treatment facilities. In addition, a location for each neighborhood system would also have to be selected and acquired by the owner of the facility, be it the Town or a neighborhood association. Further analysis comparing neighborhood sewer systems to individual systems will need to be part of future technical evaluation and public policy discussions. Stormwater Management Stormwater management has been a key part of the IWRMP process since the beginning. During the development of Phase II of the IWRMP, a series of proposed stormwater improvements were identified to limit the direct discharge of stormwater to surface waters in Town. One location was the town-owned boat ramp for Long Pond on Crowells Bog Road. Currently stormwater runs directly down the access road into the Pond. However, the Town is redesigning the boat ramp, parking area, and incorporating updated stormwater practices to prevent direct discharge of untreated runoff into Long Pond. Other stormwater improvements at Breakwater Landing, Crosby Landing and Paine’s Creek have been completed and the Walker’s Pond boat ramp upgrade is planned for this spring. Brewster adopted a new stormwater management bylaw at its November 2021 Town Meeting. This bylaw is required under the federal Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) regulation under the federal Clean Water Act. The bylaw requires both minor and major projects to design and build stormwater management systems to prevent the overland flow of water directly to ponds and coastal waters. It also incorporates treatment requirements to protect groundwater quality where stormwater is infiltrated into the ground. Over time it will help improve water quality, especially in areas where stormwater is currently flowing directly to a surface water. Projects creating less than 500 square feet of impervious cover or disturbing less than 10,000 square feet of land are required to apply for a minor permit. As part of the application the runoff volume from the project must be calculated and one or more stormwater management practices, such as a rain garden or vegetated swale must be sized and installed. Larger projects must apply for a major permit to be reviewed by either the Planning Board or the Conservation Commission if the Conservation Commission has jurisdiction under the state Wetlands Protection Act. These larger projects must document that the stormwater will be managed in accordance with the state’s stormwater management regulations. 16 The Planning Board is now finalizing a set of implementation regulations for the bylaw. They are also working with Town staff to develop application forms and instructions for both the major and minor permits. These new requirements for stormwater will help improve water quality through Brewster. Herring River Watershed As mentioned above, the Town’s obligations for nitrogen management in the Herring River watershed involve limiting the nitrogen load from future development. The strategies considered for future development in the Pleasant Bay watershed could be applied for the Herring River watershed as well. Further work is needed to quantify the extent of buildout possible in this watershed given recent open space acquisitions by the Town to refine the management strategies for Herring River. Summary of Potential Costs & Funding Sources Based on the information provided above, the overall cost for implementing the primary components of the IWRMP as of 2022 is approximately $22,970,000 - $31,070,000. Table 2 shows a breakdown of costs for the Pleasant Bay watershed and freshwater pond management which are the two issues with significant management costs. For Pleasant Bay, the overall cost includes the neighborhood wastewater treatment plant option as this is less expense than using individual septic treatment systems. In most towns, the implementation of wastewater management strategies includes funding from the property owner and the town. How the funding is managed in Brewster still needs to be evaluated. The extent of town funding is often based on the benefits received by all residents in the town. For example, the restoration of water quality in a pond or coastal estuary can benefit all resident who have access to the water. Table 2 also provides information on the potential for the Town to obtain a State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan to finance the costs or to get funding from the recently created Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund (CCIWPF). Funding for CCIWPF is through taxes on hotels and short-term rental facilities. To receive an SRF Loan, the Town must apply through the MA Clean Water Trust. If the Trust approves a project, it is then eligible for funding from the CCIWPF. The CCIWPF funds are used to repay a portion of the SRF loan. For a project to be eligible for SRF funding, the Trust requires DEP approval of a comprehensive wastewater management plan, IWRMP, targeted watershed plan or project specific plan. Cape Cod Commission Clean Water Act Section 208 approval is also required for a project to be eligible for SRF funding. Proposed project(s) must be submitted to the Clean Water Trust for inclusion on the annual Intended Use Plan. If a project is included on the plan, it is then eligible for SRF funding. Funding is provided as a 20-year loan with a maximum interest rate of 2%. Some projects can qualify for a lower interest rate as well. Projects demonstrating their   Table 2:  Summary of IWRMP Costs and Funding Options     Pleasant Bay Watershed Project  Golf Course Fertilizer Adjustment and Fairway Size Refinements Cost:   $20,000  SRF Funding Eligibility No CCIWPF Eligibility  No  Construction of Captains Golf Course I/A Treatment System.  Cost:   $200,000  SRF Funding Eligibility Possible   CCIWPF Eligibility  Possible at 50% of SRF cost  WWTP Planning.   Cost:    $200,000 ‐ $225,000 SRF Funding Eligibility  Possible  CCIWPF Eligibility  Possible – At about 50%   WWTP Design and Permitting.   Cost:    $200,000 ‐ $225,000 SRF Funding Eligibility  No  CCIWPF Eligibility  No  Construction of a Neighborhood WWTP*.    Cost: $10,000,000 ‐ $15,000,000  SRF Funding Eligibility  Possible CCIWPF Eligibility  Possible –at 25%         Fresh Water Ponds Project  Development of an Updated Report on Pond Water Quality Cost:    $50,000 SRF Funding Eligibility  Possible CCIWPF Eligibility    Possible – At about 50%  Development of a Pilot Program for Septic Upgrades Near Freshwater Ponds.   Cost:    $300,000 ‐ $350,000 SRF Funding Eligibility  Possible CCIWPF Eligibility  Possible – At about 50%   Installation of I/A Septic Systems Adjacent to Fresh Water Ponds.   Cost:   $12,000,000 ‐ $15,000,000 SRF Funding Eligibility Unlikely CCIWPF Eligibility  Unlikely   Total Cost:    $22,970,000 ‐ $31,070,000 Total SRF Funding Eligibility  $10,750,000 ‐ $15,825,000 Total CCIWPF Eligibility      $2,875,000 ‐   $4,162,500   * Note: The WWTP cost is for the larger system serving approximately 150 homes.  The costs for onsite septic treatment systems for Pleasant Bay are not included here as the neighborhood WWTP is currently the more cost effective option.   17 implementation will not result in any growth in development can qualify for a 0% interest rate. In 2021, 75% of the projects that requested SRF support were awarded a loan by the Clean Water Trust. The CCIWPF provides separate funds, as grants to the Towns that participate in the program. The funds are provided only for projects approved for an SRF loan. Each year the grants are provided based on the funds available and the number of projects eligible for funding. This data is used to select a subsidy percentage for each project. For the first round of funding through the CCIWPF, awards for projects on the Intended Use Plan were provided at a rate of 25% of the project cost. Small projects, below $1,000,000, are eligible for twice the percentage awarded to other projects. Awards for all projects are paid out in equal installments over four years after they are awarded. Per correspondence with DEP officials in Summer 2021, based on the information provided in Table 2, Brewster could potentially receive SRF funding on one or more 20-year loans, for the planning projects, the installation of the septic treatment system at Captains Golf Course, and the construction of the neighborhood wastewater facility. A total of $10,750,000 - $15,825,000 could be funded. If awarded SRF funding, there would then be funds available from the CCIWPF to support the repayment of the SRF loans. Assuming a 25% payment of the cost of each project (and 50% for projects under $1,000,000 in cost) a total of $2,875,000 - $4,162,500 could be financed through the CCIWPF. Conclusions – Summary of Next Steps Reducing the nitrogen load to Pleasant Bay and developing a plan to restore pond water quality are the two main water resource issues for Brewster. For Pleasant Bay, the extent of nitrogen reduction that can be achieved at Captains Golf Course will determine the extent of wastewater management needed in the watershed, either through a neighborhood wastewater treatment plant, the use of nitrogen treatment technologies for onsite septic systems or a nitrogen trade with another town in the watershed. For freshwater ponds, the Town is planning to develop updated information on their water quality status. With that information, the primary goal is to develop a program to upgrade septic systems along the pond shores to minimize impacts from nitrogen and phosphorus. Following additional data collection and technical analysis, decisions on these topics will need to be made in the next 1-3 years and ongoing outreach is planned to obtain input from town residents to help inform these critical policy decisions. 18 REFERENCES Barnstable Clean Water Coalition. December 2021. Coalition Quarterly – Fall 2021 Newsletter. https://bcleanwater.org/living-lab-cape-cod-blog/coalition-quarterly-issue-17-fall-2021/. Cape Cod Commission, 2017. Watershed Report – Quivett Creek, Brewster and Dennis. https://www.capecodcommission.org/resource- library/file/?url=/dept/commission/team/Website_Resources/208/watershedreports/2017_Wa tershed_Report_MC_Quivett_Creek.pdf . Horsley Witten Group, Inc. July 2020. Pleasant Bay Alliance Task 1A: On-Site Denitrification Systems Summary Report. Prepared with grant funding from the EPA Southeast New England Program. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. April 16, 2018. Memorandum - Updated Buildout Analysis for the Pleasant Bay Watershed. Horsley Witten Group, Inc. January 2013. Integrated Water Resource Management Plan - Phase II Report Horsley Witten Group, Inc. March 2015. Pleasant Bay Nitrogen Management Alternatives Analysis Report. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. August 2018. Pleasant Bay Watershed Permit 001-0. Pleasant Bay Alliance. March 2018. Pleasant Bay Targeted Watershed Management Plan. Town of Brewster Water Department, June 2021. 2020 Water Quality Report (CCR). (https://www.brewster-ma.gov/departments-mainmenu-26/water-department-mainmenu-39) University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School of Marine Science and Technology. May 2006. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Pleasant Bay System, Orleans, Chatham and Harwich, Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School of Marine Science and Technology. December 2008. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Namskaket Marsh Estuarine System, Orleans, Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School of Marine Science and Technology. April 2011. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Bass River Embayment System, Towns of Yarmouth and Dennis, Massachusetts. 19 University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School of Marine Science and Technology. March 2013. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Herring River System, Harwich, Massachusetts. University of Massachusetts Dartmouth School of Marine Science and Technology. June 2021. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for the Pleasant Bay System, Orleans, Chatham and Harwich, Massachusetts 2020 Update Final Report. Appendix A - 208 Compliance Reports 2021 The Cumulative Town Snapshot section summarizes the funding snapshot categories since 2015 Complete or Approved Partial Not Shared or Not Approved Not AvailableSYMBOL LEGEND OTHER LEGEND The Cumulative Town Snapshot section summarizes the funding snapshot categories since 2015 Progress shown is for the period from November 2020 through November 2021 208 COMPLIANCE REPORT | 2021 Brewster Town Team: • Comprehensive Water Planning Committee (dissolved 2015) • Water Quality Review Committee • Town Planner • Health Agent • Natural Resources Director • Horsley Witten Group Collaborations: • Pleasant Bay Alliance • Town of Chatham • Town of Harwich • Town of Orleans • MassDEP • Cape Cod Commission • SNEP Network Town of Brewster Town(s) with Joint Agreement or Plan in Place Priority Watershed Watershed 28,910 kg N22,690 kg N 48,210 kg N40,201 kg N Town of ALL PROPERTIES SERVED BY CENTRALIZED SYSTEMS - Plans and permits in the priority watersheds as identified by the 208 Plan Implementation Report in 2017. *Bass River watershed, <1% nitrogen allocation for Brewster **Swan Pond River watershed, <1% nitrogen allocation for Brewster * ** PRIORITY WATERSHED PROGRESSTEAM Team members engaged in water quality planning efforts. MS4 COMPLIANCE 12 Cape Cod towns are required to address stormwater discharge under the MS4 Permit. Towns with nitrogen impaired waters must meet additional permit requirements. TMDLTMDL NON- TRADITIONAL PROJECTS UNDERWAY TOTAL FLOW COLLECTED BY CENTRALIZED SYSTEMS TOWN MEETING APPROVED FUNDING CUMULATIVE TOWN SNAPSHOT SINCE 208 PLAN APPROVAL GRANT FUNDING RECEIVED 3 -$612K $482K* Subject to MS4 Permit No Additional nitrogen related requirements In compliance with MS4 Permit requirements Plan In Place Agreement In Place Consistency Determination Permits Issued Plan In Place Pleasant Bay Watershed Plan (2018) Agreement In Place Pleasant Bay IMA Consistency Determination 208 Consistency Determination (2018) Permits Issued Watershed Permit (2018) Pleasant BayHerring River (Harwich) Current Attenuated Watershed Load Current Attenuated Watershed Load Complete or Approved Partial Not Shared or Not Approved Not AvailableSYMBOL LEGEND OTHER LEGEND Text color indicates that data made available is 5 years or older 2016 201720192019Brewster 208 COMPLIANCE REPORT | 2021 WATER USE EMBAYMENT MONITORING PARCEL DATA ASSESSOR DATA TOWN REGIONAL DATA SHARING STATUSTown of IMPLEMENTATION Actions taken relative to plan and project implementation and regulatory and town meeting actions. FUNDING Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund Member Community Actions taken during the reporting period to secure funding for water quality improvement plans and projects. Progress shown is for the period from November 2020 through November 2021 TOWN IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS LOCAL REGULATORY ACTIONS Fertilizer By-Law in Place Zoning Changes • None in reporting period Adoption of Regulations • None in reporting period Town Funding Actions • 2021 Professional services for MS4 stormwater permitting and compliance ($80,000 Approved) • 2021 Walkers Pond Water Quality Evaluation ($40,000 Approved) • 2021 Pleasant Bay Fertilizer Impact Assessment at Captains Golf Course ($140,000 Approved) • 2021 Integrated Water Resources Planning and Implementation ($75,000 Approved) Grant Funding • None in reporting period Implementation Actions reflect unfunded municipal actions such as, inter-municipal agreements, procedural approvals, and committee actions. • None in reporting period * From Town Snapshot: grant funds reflect a decrease of $20k from the 2020 report, as a grant was previously duplicated. PROJECT STATUS Project Stage Captains Golf Course Fertilizer Reduction Captains Golf Course Fertigation On-site Denitrification Systems PRestoration Project Remediation Project Reduction Project Pilot project FEASIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION Brewster Select Board May 24, 2021 •Established by MA legislature in 2018 to help 15 Cape & Island towns pay for wastewater infrastructure and water quality remediation projects (Chapter 337 of the Acts of 2018) to meet the obligations of the 208 Plan •Affiliated with existing state programs – Clean Water State Revolving Fund and Clean Water Trust •Funded through 2.75% additional surcharge added to all lodging transactions (traditional and short-term rentals) effective July 1, 2019 •Comprised of member representatives from each town – must be TA/M, Town staff, or Select Board •Cape Cod Commission provides support and technical assistance •Responsible for determining the subsidy allocation, including equitable distribution among participating towns for projects and debt relief •Developed and adopted regulations and bylaws in Fall 2020 •Project must be eligible for SRF funding to receive a subsidy from the CCIWPF •CCIWPF regulations specifically identify eligibility: •Innovative strategies and alternative septic systems •Drainage improvements •Projects to improve water quality in fresh water ponds •Brewster has never participated in SRF loan program •CCC is committed to assisting communities with SRF •25% subsidy for new eligible projects in equal installments over 4 years for Clean Water Trust loans •25% subsidy for pre-existing projects in equal installments over 10 years for already issued debt •Expense assumptions: •$65.9M in prior eligible debt – commitments made in April 2021 •Existing CWT loans ($30M in FY18; $65M in FY19; $24M in FY20; $86M in FY21) – commitments made in April 2021 •$60M/year in new loans in FY22+ •2% project cost annual escalator •Revenue assumptions: •$9.1M actual FY20 revenues •$15M estimated FY21 revenues •$17.4M projected FY22 revenues (+16% from FY21 estimates) •$19.1M projected FY23 revenues (+10% from FY22 projections) •2.5% projected revenue increases in FY24+ •.5% investment earnings •Brewster contributions to date: $1.4M •Likely annual contribution of ~$1M based on recent lodging tax data •Water Resource Planning - $75k/year (Free Cash @ Spring 2021 Town Meeting) •Captain’s Golf Course Fertilizer Impact Assessment (Nitrogen Leaching Rate Study) - $140k (Free Cash @ Spring 2021 Town Meeting) •Captain’s Golf Course Septic System Upgrade - $170k •Neighborhood Wastewater Facility (or Nitrogen Trade) - ~$6M •Road & Drainage Improvements - $200+k/year •Alternative/Innovative Septic Systems (Phosphorus Mitigation) - $6-10M •2.75% rooms tax on all lodging via CCIWPF, subject to disbursement of Management Board consistent with regulations & bylaws – current practice •Free Cash appropriations – current practice •2.75% rooms tax on all lodging via special act where Town would retain full control over revenues & expenditures – Town Meeting & State Legislature approval required •Up to 3% community impact fee on short-term rentals (only) via local option – Town Meeting approval required (35% of revenues collected must be spent on affordable housing or infrastructure) •Up to 3% Water Infrastructure Investment Fund (WIIF) tax on local property taxes – Town Meeting approval required •Work with Town staff/consultants to finalize list of upcoming Brewster water resource projects and associated costs •Determine SRF eligibility of Brewster projects with Cape Cod Commission •Decide on preferred approach to funding future Brewster water resource projects       2021 ANNUAL REPORT CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND     PREPARED FOR: Chairs of the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Senate: Rebecca L. Rausch, Chair James B. Eldridge, Vice Chair 24 Beacon Street, Room 218 Boston, MA 02133 House: Carolyn C. Dykema, Chair Mindy Domb, Vice Chair 24 Beacon Street, Room 473F Boston, MA 02133 Cape Cod and Islands Legislative Delegation Senator Julian Cyr 24 Beacon Street, Room 312-E Boston, MA 02133 Senator Susan L. Moran 24 Beacon Street, Room 506 Boston, MA 02133 Representative David T. Vieira 24 Beacon Street, Room 167 Boston, MA 02133 Representative Kip A. Diggs 24 Beacon Street Boston, MA 02133 Representative Sarah K. Peake 24 Beacon Street, Room 7 Boston, MA 02133 Representative Timothy R. Whelan 24 Beacon Street, Room 542 Boston, MA 02133 Representative Dylan A. Fernandes 24 Beacon Street, Room 472 Boston, MA 02133 Representative Steven G. Xiarhos 24 Beacon Street Boston, MA 02133 PREPARED BY: Cape Cod Commission, on behalf of the Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund Management Board 3225 Main Street P.O. Box 226 Barnstable, MA 02630 January 2021 CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 3 The Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund (CCIWPF) was established by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2018 (M.G.L. Chapter 29C, Section 19) to help Cape Cod and Islands towns pay for necessary wastewater infrastructure and water quality remediation projects. Creation of the CCIWPF was the result of efforts by a diverse set of stakeholders, including the Cape Cod and Islands Legislative Delegation, local officials, environmental groups, business leaders, and the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce, who recognized the need for new financial tools to address the region’s degrading water quality and lack of wastewater infrastructure. The CCIWPF is a dedicated fund within the Massachusetts Clean Water Trust set up to solely benefit communities within the counties of Barnstable, Dukes, and Nantucket. Its source of revenue is a 2.75% excise tax on traditional lodging and short-term rentals. The fund is administered by the Clean Water Trust and overseen by a management board comprised of representatives from every member town from the region. Currently, the 15 Cape Cod communities are members of the CCIWPF. The Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund Management Board (Board) was established by M.G.L. Chapter 29C, Section 20. The Board is responsible for determining the method for allocating subsidies from the fund, including, but not limited to, an equitable distribution among participating municipalities consistent with revenue deposited from each municipality into the fund. The Board Is also responsible for ensuring that the Water Protection Fund is spent only for the purposes set forth in M.G.L. Chapter 29C, Section 19. This report has been prepared pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 29C, Section 20, Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund Management Board. CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 4 CCIWPF Revenue As received from the Department of Revenue through the Clean Water Trust, fund revenue to date (July 2019 through November 2021) totals $39,337,123.18. Income generated by the fund for this period totals $95,312.05. Subsidies for projects listed on Intended Use Plans for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund dating back to the creation of the CCIWPF (2018) will be paid over 4 years, while subsidies for eligible pre- existing debt incurred for clean water projects that pre-date the CCIWPF will be paid over 10 years. Subsidy awards made to date are described below. The Year 1 transfer from the Clean Water Trust totals $13,708,673, as detailed in the Expenses and Project Summaries section below. The balance of the fund at the end of the calendar year 2021 is $25,723,762.23. CCIWPF Amounts Revenue to Date $39,337,123.18 Fund Income to Date $95,312.05 Year 1 (2021) Transfer $13,708,673.00 Balance $25,723,762.23 Expenses and Project Summaries On April 14, 2021 the Board voted to award the first set of subsidies to qualified and eligible water quality projects in several Cape Cod towns. Per the regulations established by the Board in 2020, projects in excess of $1 million received subsidies equal to 25% of the project costs. Projects of $1 million or less received 50% subsidies. Projects eligible for funding include, but are not limited to, innovative strategies and alternative septic system technologies, water quality and wastewater management planning, the construction of sewer collection systems and wastewater treatment plants, and the implementation of drainage improvements and water treatment programs to improve water quality in freshwater ponds and marine resources. Member communities must go through the Clean Water State Revolving Fund program, or SRF, and be listed on the Clean Water SRF Intended Use Plan (IUP) to receive funds. Contingent commitments are made upon release of the annual IUP. Final commitments are made following execution of a Project Regulatory Agreement (PRA). CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 5 Final Commitments for 2018 and 2019 Intended Use Plans Projects Town IUP Year Description Project Cost Total Subsidy Chatham 2018 Phase 1D – Chatham/Harwich Regionalization $8,174,858 $2,043,715 Chatham 2019 Sewer Extension $1,324,983 $331,246 Harwich 2018 Harwich Sewer Collection System – Phase 2 $22,214,467 $5,553,617 Bourne 2019 Buzzards Bay Wastewater Treatment Facility $4,660,410 $1,165,103 Orleans 2019 Downtown Area Collection System and Wastewater Treatment Facility $59,409,200 $14,852,300 Totals $95,783,918 $23,945,981 Contingent Commitments for 2020 and 2021 Intended Use Plans Projects Town IUP Year Description Project Cost Total Subsidy Barnstable 2020 Wastewater Pump Station Improvements Project $1,000,000 $500,000 Barnstable 2020 Strawberry Hill Road Sewer Expansion $13,275,023 $3,318,756 Barnstable 2020 Route 28 and Yarmouth Road Intersection Sewer $1,853,762 $463,441 Barnstable 2020 Solids Handling Upgrade Project $8,495,050 $2,123,763 Chatham 2021 Chatham Queen Anne Pumping Station Upgrade 2021 PE $2,464,000 $616,000 Chatham 2021 Chatham Stormwater Improvement Projects - 2021 $6,161,000 $1,540,250 Barnstable 2021 Route 28 East Sewer Expansion Project $17,106,000 $4,276,500 Barnstable 2021 Wastewater Pump Station Improvements Project $2,000,000 $500,000 Mashpee 2021 Mashpee WRRF and Collection System - Phase I $51,200,000 $12,800,000 Falmouth 2021 Falmouth Wastewater Treatment Facility TASA Improvements $19,000,000 $4,750,000 Totals $122,554,835 $30,888,710   CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 6 Pre-Existing Debt Consistent with the provision in M.G.L. Chapter 29C, Section 19, certain Cape Cod and Islands communities are eligible for subsidies for debt incurred for water pollution abatement projects apart from the Clean Water Trust prior to the establishment of the CCIWPF. On April 14, 2021, the Board voted to award subsidies for pre-existing debt to the towns of Barnstable, Chatham, Falmouth, and Provincetown, subject to verification of eligibility. In April 2021, estimated pre-existing debt totaled approximately $65.9 million, 25% of which would be subsidized through the fund, per the unanimous vote of the Board. Town Estimated Pre-Existing Debt (April 2021) Estimated Total Subsidy Provincetown $19,198,453 $4,799,613 Barnstable $3,958,400 $989,600 Chatham $34,619,778 $8,654,945 Falmouth $8,113,640 $2,028,410 Totals $65,890,271 $16,472,568 Upon verification, the final pre-existing debt and subsidy amounts are presented below. Town Eligible Pre-Existing Debt Total Subsidy Provincetown $11,729,661 $2,932,415 Barnstable $4,842,300 $1,210,575 Chatham $21,391,410 $5,347,853 Falmouth $7,675,200 $1,918,800 Totals $45,638,571 $11,409,643 Administrative Expenses The Cape Cod Commission is charged with providing administrative and technical support to the Board. On behalf of the Management Board, the Commission contracts with consultants to provide additional financial and legal support, as necessary and requested by the Board. Costs associated with this support from January 2019 through November 2021 total $112,057.30, as detailed below. At their December 14, 2021, the Board’s Executive Committee voted to recommend the Board reimburse the Commission for these expenses. It is anticipated the Board will vote on this matter in early 2022. CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 7 Expenditures Amount Cape Cod Commission Personnel Salaries, including fringe benefits and indirect costs $38,352.30 Contractual Services Pierce Atwood – legal $44,455.00 PFM Financial Advisors $29,250.00 Total Expenditures $112,057.30 5-Year Revenue Projections The Board, through Barnstable County through the Cape Cod Commission, contracted with PFM Financial Advisors to provide advisory services relative to subsidy allocations and revenue projections. In consultation with the Board and based on their expertise in forecasting and financial modeling, PFM Financial Advisors developed the following 5-year revenue projections. Growth in revenue is anticipated to be greater in 2022 and 2023, as a result of increased short-term rental use over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. 2021 2022 2023 2024 2026 2027 Revenue $15,000,000 $17,400,000 $19,140,000 $19,618,500 $20,108,963 $20,611,687 Revenue Growth 16.00% 10.00% 2.50% 2.50% 2.50% In summary, the Cape Cod and Islands Water Protection Fund receipts through November 2021 totaled $39,337,123.18. In 2021, the CCIWPF Board voted to award subsidies for 15 projects and to 4 towns for pre-existing debt. The total transferred from the CCIWPF in 2021 for project subsidies totaled $13,708,673. With the addition of fund investment income totaling $95,312.05, the balance of the fund at the end of the calendar year 2021 was $25,723,762.23. CAPE COD AND ISLANDS WATER PROTECTION FUND 2021 ANNUAL REPORT 8 At their meeting on January 11, 2022, the CCIWPF Board voted to approve final commitments for subsidies to fund qualified projects listed on the 2020 Clean Water State Revolving Fund Intended Use Plans, for which Project Regulatory Agreements have been executed in the amounts of: Town Project Project Cost in PRA Total Subsidy Barnstable Solids Handling Upgrade Project $11,313,805 $2,828,451 Barnstable Wastewater Pump Station Improvements Project $1,226,751 $306,688 Barnstable RTE 28 Yarmouth Rd Sewer $1,731,512 $432,878 Barnstable Strawberry Hill Road Sewer Expansion $12,289,531 $3,072,383 The CCIWPF Board also voted to approve final subsidies to qualified and eligible town projects for verified pre-existing debt in the towns of Barnstable, Chatham, Falmouth, and Provincetown in the amounts of: Town Eligible Pre-Existing Debt Total Subsidy Provincetown $11,729,661 $2,932,415 Barnstable $4,842,300 $1,210,575 Chatham $21,391,410 $5,347,853 Falmouth $7,675,200 $1,918,800 Totals $45,638,571 $11,409,643 Lastly, the CCIWPF Board voted to approve additional subsidies for authorized debt and debt that was not issued as of April 14, 2021 in the amounts of $1,478,010 for Provincetown, pending loan issuance and closure, and $803,750 for Chatham, as show below: Town Amount Status Total Subsidy Provincetown $1,651,000 Pending Loan Closure $1,478,010 $2,486,000 Pending Loan Closure $1,775,041 Pending Issuance Chatham $1,850,000 Closed 5/27/2021 $803,750 $235,000 Closed 5/27/2021 $1,130,000 Closed 5/27/2021 These subsidies, and any transfers or payments made related to these subsidies, will be reflected in the 2022 annual report. Finance Committee Minutes February 2, 2022 Page 1 of 4 TOWN OF BREWSTER FINANCE COMMITTEE Date: February 2, 2022 Time: 6:00 PM VIRTUAL MEETING MINUTES Present: Chair Pete Dahl, Vice Chair Frank Bridges, Clerk Bill Meehan, Honey Pivirotto, Robert Tobias, Alex Hopper, Bob Young, William Henchy Also present: Peter Lombardi, Town Administrator; Mimi Bernardo, Finance Director Absent: Andy Evans The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm and announced a quorum. This meeting will be conducted by remote participation pursuant to Chapter 20 of the Acts of 2021. No in-person meeting attendance will be permitted. If the Town is unable to live broadcast this meeting, a record of the proceedings will be provided on the Town website as soon as possible. The meeting may be viewed by: Live broadcast (Brewster Government TV Channel 18), Livestream (livestream.brerwster-ma.gov), or Video recording (tv.brewster-ma.gov). 1. Public Announcements and Comment- none Pete wanted to mention that the Interim Nauset Regional Superintendent has been appointed permanent Superintendent. Congratulations. 2. Town Administrator/Finance Director Report Peter Lombardi said the storm was a significant winter weather event. We did well, all things considered, and want to acknowledge the DPW for all their efforts over the weekend. The white-out conditions made it very difficult even for the crews to be out for several hours. They did a great job in a very difficult situation. It has been a struggle hiring private plowing contractors over the last several years, for a variety of reasons. A good number of our staff in other departments, Natural Resources, Golf, Water, were all out there on their own routes manning a plow. This is tremendous and speaks to a small-town infrastructure. Kudos to them. Chief Moran did a really great job as Emergency Management Director. We had a warming/charging station at Town Hall on Sunday for a 5+ hours. We didn’t have many people come in. EVERSOURCE was very strong in communication with the Town and generally got power back quickly on Sunday. The Select Board approved deficit spending in the Snow and Ice Budget. Our ARPA allocation was a little over $1M in direct funding and another $1.9M of Brewster’s allocation by population that has been directed to the county. The county is going through a process on how their portion of those funds are allocated. Last week, we had Barnstable County officials in. Because the US Treasury made modifications to their final rule, we have a lot more discretion. We would like to see 100% of those funds directed to the Town. They would make a huge difference. We have the Sea Camps coming online and even in the interim, there are costs associated with the property. The CPC is developing a 5-year Community Preservation Plan. Part of the scope of work is the extent to which it might make sense to make modifications to the CPA allocation formula. We are working with Town Counsel to see Approved: VOTE: Finance Committee Minutes February 2, 2022 Page 2 of 4 what that might look like and how a ballot initiative might be necessary to make that change to the bylaw. The Select Board approved the 2022 member rates for the Captain’s Golf Course on Monday night. We will get into the budget next week. We would like to transition into an Enterprise Fund for FY23. We spent a fair amount of time developing next year’s budget up to the 10-year Capital outlook. We have added a new expense line to include a new Capital Stabilization fund, funded at $400,000 and, presumably, that amount will be included in this year and next to build up to $800,000 and then the debt will come online for either the irrigation project and/or the maintenance facility in 2025. Bill Meehan said if you take the longer view on the progress for the Golf Operation, you will have to categorize it as “a new dawn is coming.” This is a very vital operation, and he couldn’t be more pleased with the progress they have made and what is to come. 3. Integrated Water Resource Management Plan – Financial Impacts Pete said after listening in to the Select Board meeting, there were a lot of large numbers being discussed, and wonders what imminent financial impacts there will be on the horizon. Peter Lombardi said the high points in terms of finances is in a table in the report in the packet. One side covers all the known or anticipated costs with Pleasant Bay watershed permit. In the near term, we are talking about just the first couple of projects. We have a standing $75,000 line item in the budget for Horsley Witten and our participation in the Watershed Alliance for water quality planning work. We have one capital request to upgrade the Captain’s Golf Course septic system - $200,000 is on the high end for what we believe that project will cost. The bigger picture is there are some additional nitrogen mitigation requirements under that permit. Order of magnitude, we are around 75% of the way there already. There is still some gap. There are a number of ways we can get there. We could go into a neighborhood wastewater sewage system estimated at $10M-$15M. We are looking at all possible options. Obviously if there is a sewar system there is operating expenses the town would assume going forward. On the Pond Side, we have near term capital expenses – $50,000 for an updated report on pond water quality. Then there is the pilot program to install innovative alternative septic systems around the pond and then determine the efficacy of those systems in terms of nitrogen and phosphorous mitigation estimated at $300,000. These would happen in the next year to 3 years. Big picture costs on the pond side would be upgrading buffer systems to innovative alternatives would cost between $12M-$15M. Based on the discussion of the Select Board is the extent to which Brewster remains in the Cape and Islands Water Protection Fund. Brewster contributes about $1M/year to that wastewater fund and this goes directly to the State and is distributed by the Board. We have contributed $2.6M in the past 2.5 years, and they are estimated to go up. When you look at all our projects, of the $31M in total costs, we would be eligible for a little under $4.2M in direct reimbursement over the next 10– 15-year period. The Select Board is going to explore opting out of the Cape and Islands Water Protection Fund as early as this May. We are looking at different funding scenarios. Frank was very impressed with the presentation. What hit home for him was that the fact that the data on the 80 ponds in Brewster was so dated – 2007/2009. A lot of our Brewster ponds have been compromised, but when we compile the recent data and get a more accurate assessment of the condition of the ponds, preventing a pond from becoming compromised is a lot less expensive than fixing it once it is compromised. He is way more concerned about the conditions of the ponds in Brewster, and we need to act on that now. Peter Lombardi said we are subject to a regulatory permit and must meet certain standards in that permit and that is what a lot of our attention has been focused on. There is a pilot program in Barnstable and once they get through the next three years, they will consider those technologies for general use approval. DEP doesn’t necessarily recognize the data until they feel more comfortable with it. He also said in answer to Frank, the data was in 2009. Our next capital request is to pull that information together to develop a more refined plan around the ponds in the coming years. Pete wondered what the process was to withdraw. Peter answered it is a Town Meeting vote. Finance Committee Minutes February 2, 2022 Page 3 of 4 4. Budget Calendar – Discussion and Approval Pete said these are important meetings. Frank will be taking the lead on them because Pete may not be available. Peter Lombardi said we are on for Monday at 6 and it is an 8:30 start on Wednesday am. We are transitioning away from the traditional budget book set up for the open gov online budgeting platform this year. We will be providing access to the public link to the budget book. All the materials will be available online including supporting documents. It has been a tremendous amount of work to transition to this format. We think it will be worthwhile, but it is always a heavy lift to getting it up and going. Pete asked with the new budget platform, is there a point where the data is frozen. Peter Lombardi answered the intent is that it will be live and in real time. Once we get into middle of March, the Warrant will be printed, and it will be done. We don’t anticipate much change after our presentations next week. It will be more of a real time budget document. It’s not like you must wait for a packet, you will be able to see the latest information right away. 5. Nauset Regional Public Schools Budget – Discussion and Strategic Direction Pete sent out the updated questions the committee wants to be sent to the school. Having been on a school committee before, you don’t want to be spending money on permanent issues that will sunset in a year or two. This creates a roadmap of how we would like them to respond. Bill Meehan thinks the assembly of the questions are good – they are good questions and comprehensive. If we get cogent comprehensive answers to these questions, we will be light years ahead of where we were last year. Bob Young was wondering if we were going to get the Select Board on board and how we go about that. Peter Lombardi said that on Monday they have included an agenda item to talk about these questions. 6. Nauset Regional Public School and Brewster School Department – Budget reconciliation No further discussion from above Agenda item. 7. Liaison Assignments and Reports Bay Property Planning Committee and the Pond Property Planning Committee. With each of these there will be significant work and meetings and time and reporting back to the Finance Committee. He has three members who have reached out to him expressing an interest in being involved. The charge for these committees was included in the packet. The charge for the Bay Property Planning Committee will be very significant. Pete’s plan is to conduct a vote of the committee for each of the assignments. These are significant committees which will be significant in time spent. Peter Lombardi said estimates would be 2x/month for at least 2 years; on the Pond side we think that will go a little more quickly as the majority of the property would have a conservation restriction on it, so that process will begin to meet on a bi-weekly basis, but the timeline will be a little quicker – 1-1.5 years. Bill Meehan would happily accept an appointment to either committee. Frank Bridges is open to both as well. Bill Henchy feels same. Bill Henchy has agreed to take the charge for the Nauset Regional School Committee as the liaison for the Finance Committee. He is happy to do it but wants to be effective in that role working through greater Finance Committee Minutes February 2, 2022 Page 4 of 4 transparency and understanding their process. He hopes to have the support of the Select Board in doing so for overall success. Pete will announce the decision next week as the Committee didn’t feel comfortable voting. Reports: Honey said on the Council on Aging (COA), the Director, Denise Rego, will be leaving in one year. The Program Manager, Lisa Donovan, is leaving in the next couple of weeks, as she has also given her notice. She therefore was wondering if anything was coming up there. The Board of Health reached out asking for assistance in reaching people over 65 (about 500 people) to make sure they received all the vaccinations. Peter Lombardi said that the COA personnel, Denise has given notice and we will miss her. The benefit of her giving that much notice is that we will have a long lead time in making sure we have a good succession plan in place. Lisa Donovan, the Director of Social Activities is going back to what she had done previously. That position is one of the 4 approved with the override a few years ago. No major plans to restructure the COA at this time. Robert Tobias said the Brewster Affordable Housing Trust (BAHT), last year we put in request for proposals for the Millstone Road Community Housing Project. Two were returned, one incomplete, the other was from the Preservation for Affordable Housing jointly with the Housing Assistance Corporation. Their presentation will be given tomorrow evening at the BAHT meeting at 5PM. He recommends the committee attend if interested. 8. Review and Approval of Minutes – 1/19/22 Bill Meehan MOVED to accept the Minutes as presented. Bill Henchy second. Roll Call Vote: Frank Bridges – yes, Bill Meehan – yes, Honey Pivirotto – yes, Robert Tobias – yes, Bob Young – yes, Alex Hopper – yes, Bill Henchy – yes, Chair Pete Dahl– yes. The Committee voted: 8-yes 0-no 9. Request for agenda items for future meetings – please email Pete 10. Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair- none 11. Next Finance Committee Meetings- Monday, 2/7/22 at 6PM & Wednesday, 2/9/22 at 8:30AM 12. Adjournment Bill Meehan MOVED to adjourn the meeting at 7:32 PM. Frank Bridges second. Roll Call Vote: Frank Bridges – yes, Bill Meehan – yes, Honey Pivirotto – yes, Robert Tobias – yes, Bob Young – yes, Alex Hopper – yes, Bill Henchy – yes, Chair Pete Dahl– yes. The Committee voted: 8-yes 0-no Respectfully submitted, Beth Devine Packet of supporting materials on the website for public review. Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 1 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING WITH SELECT BOARD & FINANCE COMMITTEE REGULAR SESSION DATE: February 07, 2022 TIME: 6:00 PM PLACE: Remote Participation REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Bingham, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Hoffmann, Selectperson Chatelain, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna Kalinick, Mimi Bernardo, Finance Committee members: Frank Bridges, William Meehan, Honey Pivirotto Andrew Evans, William Henchy, Robert Tobias, Robert Young ABSENT: Selectperson Chaffee, Finance Committee Chair Pete Dahl Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 6:00pm. A quorum was declared, and all Select Board members present were announced. Finance Committee Vice Chair Bridges declared a quorum and announced the Finance Committee members present. Chair Bingham read the meeting participation and recording statements. Public Announcements and Comment: None Select Board Announcements and Liaison Reports: None Town Administrator’s Report: Mr. Lombardi stated he has nothing to report at this time. FY23 Budget Overview Presentation and Discussion (Select Board FY22-23 Strategic Plan Goal G-6) Mr. Lombardi shared the presentation that is in the packet on pages 2-18. This is a high-level overview of the FY23 budget presentation, on Wednesday February 9th each department will be presenting their budgets to the Select Board and Finance Committee. Town Administration and Finance Director provided a financial forecast starting off the budget process about 2 months ago, meeting with department heads and going through their FY23 budgets. Mr. Lombardi noted this as a collaborative team effort, acknowledging the work of Finance Director Mimi Bernardo and Assistant Town Administrator Donna Kalinick. The highlights of the presentation included: Review of Updated Revenue Assumptions: o New Growth- projected at $225k o State Aid (cherry sheet)- 16% increased from FY22 actuals; unrestricted general government aid is up 2.7%, consistent with Gov. Baker’s proposed state budget and Brewster’s Chapter 70 (State aid for education purposes) allocation for FY23 is increasing to over $300k. o Local Receipts- 7.6% increase from a conservative FY22 assumption (area of most increase is motor vehicle excise) Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 2 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator o Short-term Rental Revenues- $250k increase to $750k, the second year these revenues are included. This is based on FY21 actuals of $1+M, totals so far this FY for the first two quarters is almost $1.4M based on data from the Department of Revenue. o Ambulance Receipts- $74k decrease to $722k due to one-time reduction in lease payments; contributes about 25% of total Fire Department operating expenses o Water Indirects- $34k increase to $193k to better reflect actual services provided o Golf Indirects - $76k increase to $205k to better reflect actual services provided o New Solar Revenues-now at Captains Golf Course main parking lot and driving range $20k per year to the General Fund to help support cost for an Energy Manager Projected $65k increase to Golf Department o New Marijuana Revenues (anticipated facility opening by Fall 2022)- $0 Mr. Lombardi mentioned that we had projected $49.5M in FY23 revenues to the General Fund in our forecast, the budget now is built on a $49.6M revenue stream for FY23. Summary of Expense Drivers and Major Changes o Cape Cod Tech Significant enrollment increase, doubled in past two years. Increased from a 4.7% share of operating budgets to 9% in terms of assessment; Proposed 35% assessment increase o Nauset Regional Projected 2.5% operating increases (plus .5% for potential enrollment increase); Proposed 6% operating increase, there was a 1.6% reduction in student enrollment, our net assessment is due to increase to 4.1%. o Brewster Elementary Schools Projected 3% increase; proposed 2.5% increase for both Eddy and Stony Brook Noteworthy FY23 Budget expense drivers o Health Insurance Projected 5% overall increase (plus elimination of one-month premium holiday in FY22); actual 3% premium increase (no premium holiday) o Pension Projected 9% increase; actual 4.2% increase based on experience o Transfers Out Projected $200k increase to Affordable Housing Trust & Capital Stabilization (Short- term rental revenues); actual $300k increase, including +$100k for a new Brewster Special Education Stabilization Fund o Town Personnel Projected 2.75% COLA, 3% step increases, plus compensation and classification study implementation; actual 5.8% increase Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 3 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator o Town Expenses Projected 2% increase (not including health insurance and pension), actual 2.4% increase (including health insurance and pension but not Sea Camps), actual 3.7% increase (all -inclusive) o Total Town Operating Expenses Actual 3.75% increase (not including Sea Camps), actual 4.8% increase (including Sea Camps) Presentation of Proposed Budget Initiatives o Purchase of the Sea Camp properties Short-term Debt due to increase by $50k to $300k due to our plan to pay down $400k balance of other short-term debt obligations this coming Spring with available funds, this is on the Long Pond property. The $650k balance for this property to be paid by short-term debt over next 2-3 fiscal years. Excluded Debt- $1.28M gross to acquire the Bay property ($20M total cost). Year 1 payment of 30 due next fall, excluded debt is anticipated to increase by a little over $1.25M. Our annual payments in FY24 and beyond will be a little under $1M. Sea Camps Property Management (short-term property plan)- gross impact of new expenses $203k, includes salary and health benefits for property manager, insurance, utilities, maintenance, and irrigation. Original $200k Town Meeting appropriation in September 2021 will cover all FY22 operating expenses, plus FY23 septic costs. Short-term revenue allocation policy, which sets aside up to 10% of funds to cover operating budget expenses directly related to goals and initiatives in the Select Board strategic plan. Including $75k of revenues to cover some of the costs associated with these expenses. Proposed Staffing Enhancements at $52k net impact on FY23 General Fund budget Public Health Nurse- $0k net due to proportional reduction in VNA expense. Seasonal Natural Resources Dept Staffing (2)- $5k net / $10k gross. Shared Town Hall Administration Assistant - $25k. Planning Office Administrative Assistant - $8k (increase hours from 19 to 5 hours, total budget impact of $19k including health insurance). Assistant Town Accountant - $3k net / $4k gross (increase hours from 35 to 37.5 for new hire). Teen/Young Adult Librarian - $6k net/$12k gross (increase hours from 27 to 35). o Creation of new Brewster Schools Special Education Stabilization Fund Intended to serve as a reserve fund for unanticipated special education and out of district tuition/transportation expenses. Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 4 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Can be approved by a vote of the Brewster School Committee and Brewster Town Meeting, no Special Act required. Would require majority approval of both Brewster School Committee and Select Board. Proposing a $100k transfer to the new fund through Chapter 70 state aid annual increases and unexpected additional levy capacity. o Other ongoing budget initiatives Continue to invest new short-term rental revenues in housing and long-term tax relief $375k to Brewster Affordable Housing Trust $300k to Capital Stabilization Fund to help mitigate tax impact of future major Town capital projects Continuing commitment to address Town’s unfunded Other Post-Employment Benefit (OPEB) liability- $300k total FY23 appropriation to Trust Fund Continuing to increase investments in technology and infrastructure/cybersecurity- $76k gross ($54k net after increase in Golf/Water indirects) FY23 Budget Summary o Estimated FY23 General Fund revenue totals: $49,619,054 o Projected FY23 General Fund operating appropriations: $49, 591, 078 o Estimated available FY23 levy capacity: $28k There was discussion regarding the indirect costs, Mr. Lombardi noted that the Water Department is formally established as an enterprise fund, and we are planning on doing the same for the Golf Department in FY23. One of the requirements as an enterprise fund is that the department be charged for time and materials that are provided by general fund departments and employees such that they are paying for the full costs of actually operating their departments and accounting for those costs in their operating expenses. The indirect calculations have been divided to drill down on each employee and what percentage of their work week on average supports water and golf, at the low end 2.5% and at the very high end 10%. Various departments as well as water and golf department heads have supported the indirects as calculated. Mr. Meehan stated that cost controls in any enterprise are vitally important and would like to see more detail to the point in saying that the services these enterprises could provide themselves at a lower cost. Mr. Lombardi noted that any enterprise funds that are small, typically rely on general fund employees to provide services, it was reviewed if services provided in house were more effective. Adding that with the golf department we finally hired a full-time administrative assistant for a $4M operation, makes sense to have this done by someone in the golf department. Mr. Lombardi provided clarification on the Brewster Schools Special Education Stabilization Fund; this new fund is meant to deal with unanticipated expenses that otherwise hadn’t been budgeted in a particular fiscal year. These are issues that were not known at the time the budget was developed. Accountability for the expenditure from the funds are through a joint vote by Select Board and Brewster School Committee and appropriations to the fund are approved by Town meeting. Responding to a question from Mr. Tobias regarding the use of the Special Education Stabilization Funds versus regional funding, Mr. Lombardi stated that excess and deficiency by the region is only available by appropriation to regional expenses, that would Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 5 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator be a scenario where there was significant unanticipated special education at the regional level, this couldn’t be applied if we ran into the same scenario at the elementary school level. Noting that this fund is specific to our elementary schools. Mr. Young requested clarification on the ambulance receipts. Mr. Lombardi reviewed that the ambulance receipts are used as an appropriation to build the general fund operating budget, since the lease payment is dropping off for FY23, we would not seek to use as much money from this account to fund the general fund budget next year. Mr. Young asked to see the beginning balances of where we are today, the planned additions to the funds (affordable housing trust and capital stabilization), the expected or planned uses and the estimated ending balance at the end of the fiscal year. This is to understand the long-term goal of where we are going to set the target balance for these stabilization funds. Commenting that there has to be a goal in terms of what size these funds should be, how to sustain them and the plans for the revenues that will get freed up once we get to a point of the appropriate balance and the sustainability at the balance. Mr. Lombardi shared that this information will be available in the budget meeting schedule for tomorrow, there is a page specific to the transfers to the trust and capital stabilization which will show the starting/ending balance and appropriations by fiscal year. Additionally, there will be a presentation of the 5-year capital plan that will review the use of capital stabilization funds at a meeting next Wednesday. Mr. Lombardi noted that as of today there is no plan on utilizing any funds from capital stabilization until at least FY25 potentially FY26, right now the only use of funds would be for the library renovation project at $2.5M. By that time, we should have at least $2M, in the financial reserves policy we have capped our appropriations to capital stabilization at 10% of the then operating budget. There have been talks about developing an operating and capital plan for the Affordable Housing Trust, should have more detail on this by end of this fiscal year. Ms. Kalinick added that the Affordable Housing Trust did set their goals and priorities for FY22, at the top of the list is to create a 5-year financial plan. Mr. Henchy inquired if the budget anticipates any use of free cash. Mr. Lombardi confirmed that we do not plan on using free cash to support our operating budget. Mr. Henchy asked the comfort level given a $49.6M budget with an upside of the levy limit of about $28k? Mr. Lombardi responded that typically once the budget process is completed, we have anywhere from $20-$50k of available levy capacity. Noting that the Town is very diligent and thorough in going through revenue projections and are generally pretty conservative on this front. To fund our capital plan, our plan relies on the assumption that we will have at least $1.75M a year to cover capital expenses, we typically try to close out the free cash balance at or above $1M. Mr. Lombardi stated that when looking at the $1M starting balance and the $1.75M free cash for capital, means you typically must land at or above $3M a year in certifying free cash. The Town feels very confident in the assumptions made on the revenue side as this is really where decision points are in terms of building capacity. There was a small discussion regarding the pension expense, it was noted that the school is up significantly more based on the language applied, the experience is a snapshot of what the school department employees are at a given time in September of each calendar year and where they were a year before that. Mr. Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 6 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Lombardi stated that it may well be that next year this could drop off significantly. Part of the reason of the FTE (full time equivalent) count at elementary schools, which is what is driving the pension number. Mr. Lombardi reviewed the set up of the budget book, the Finance Committee will receive a link to the book tomorrow for the budget meetings. Once this link is live, it will include real-time information for our residents to access. The Town Planner position was reviewed, the position is still open, and we have hired a part-time, interim Town Planner for the next three months, Charleen Greenhalgh. Follow-up Discussion on Approach to FY23 Nauset School Budgets (Select Board FY22-23 Strategic Plan Goal G-1) Del Borah was given the opportunity to make comments about his view of school choice by the Nauset Regional School Committee. Mr. Borah has presented at the Regional School Committee meetings three different times regarding school choice, at his October appearance he requested the school choice figures. And just last week Mr. Borah requested an open discussion about school choice, this has not yet been placed on their agenda. He believes communication has only been one way and at only three minutes at a time. Mr. Borah commented that over the past 10 years or so the budget is up 30% while the enrollment in the four towns in the region is down 20%. Adding that while it is true that each choice student brings in a small tuition, Mr. Borah thinks that in order to create the necessary open seats, the school committee had to have spent several dollars of the money that we provide, for every dollar of school choice tuition it receives. Adding that he thinks the key here is that the school choice tuition doesn’t reduce our assessment, it adds to the dollars the school committee has to spend, all of this leads him to ask why should the Towns continue to approve an increasing Nauset School Budget? In closing, Mr. Borah stated that he absolutely wants Nauset to have a budget that can provide a top-notch education to our kids, but also wants the money we provide to be spent on our kids. His suggestion is that Brewster think about using whatever leverage the annual Nauset budget process gives us, to hold the line on the budget until we get to a school that uses school choice at a level that is consistent with the state average. Vice Chair Bridges referenced the Finance Committee questions included in the packet regarding the Nauset Region School Operating budget, these questions are designed to help understand the budget presentation that has been prepared. Noting that it is important for the Select Board and the Finance Committee to be on the same page. Stating that based on the Select Board’s plan and goals and certainly the objectives of the Finance Committee, we would like a clearer presentation than what has been received. Mr. Bridges is looking for exactly where the numbers are coming from and how to explain these increases to the citizens at Town Meeting. Selectperson Hoffmann requested to include a question regarding a cafeteria revolving fund that was in the description of the High School budget, but no where else. Mr. Bridges added that he noticed the lack of break down of any revolving funding in the package. Selectperson Hoffmann will draft her question and submit to Chair Bingham who will communicate directly with Chair Dahl and formalize and submit the questions. For Your Information: No Discussion Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.07.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 7 of 7 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator Matters Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair: None Questions from the Media: None Next Meetings: February 9 (Joint with Finance Committee-FY23 Town Budget Details), February 14, February 16 (Joint with Finance Committee and Capital Planning Committee- 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan), February 28 (Joint with Finance Committee- FY23 School Budgets), March 7, and March 21, 2022 Adjournment Finance Committee Member William Meehan moved to adjourn at 8:07pm. Member Andrew Evans second. A roll call vote was taken by the Finance Committee. Robert Tobias-yes, Robert Young-yes, Honey Pivirotto- yes, William Henchy-yes, William Meehan-yes, Andrew Evans-yes, Chair Frank Bridges-yes. The Finance Committee vote was 7-Yes, 0-No. Selectperson Chatelain moved to adjourn at 8:07pm. Selectperson Hoffmann second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Hoffmann-yes, Selectperson Chatelain- yes, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 3- Yes, 0-No. Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant Approved: __________________ Signed: _________________________________________ Date Selectperson Chatelain, Clerk of the Select Board Accompanying Documents in Packet: Agenda, Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Overview presentation, Brewster Finance Committee Budget Questions, Nauset Regional School Operating Budget, 03 / 01 / 2022 Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.09.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 1 of 3 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING WITH SELECT BOARD & FINANCE COMMITTEE REGULAR SESSION DATE: February 09, 2022 TIME: 8:30 AM PLACE: Remote Participation REMOTE PARTICIPANTS: Chair Bingham, Selectperson Chaffee, Selectperson Hoffmann, Selectperson Whitney, Selectperson Chatelain, Town Administrator Peter Lombardi, Assistant Town Administrator Donna Kalinick, Mimi Bernardo, Conor Kenny, Finance Committee members: Vice Chair Frank Bridges, Robert Young, Andrew Evans, Honey Pivirotto, Robert Tobias, William Henchy Absent: Harvey Dahl, Alex Hopper, William Meehan Call to Order & Declaration of a Quorum, Meeting Participation Statement and Recording Statement Chair Bingham called the meeting to order at 8:30am. A quorum was declared, and all Select Board members present were announced. Finance Committee Vice Chair Bridges declared a quorum and announced Finance Committee members present. Chair Bingham read the meeting participation and recording statements. FY23 Budget Presentations (Select Board FY22-23 Strategic Plan Goal G-6) The Town of Brewster has partnered with OpenGov to publish the FY23 Budget in a new user-friendly online format. We hope and expect that the use of this platform will significantly increase our residents’ ability to access and understand the local fiscal process. Residents will be able to view the budget in detail by department. There is also the ability to change views using different report and chart styles. Any changes will be updated in real time. Once you access the Annual Budget Fiscal Year 2023 homepage, you will be directed to the Contents Page, from here you can click on any underlined/hyperlinked department or budget line item to view a department page. Please note that currently the Capital and Education sections are not live. These pages will be published before the relevant joint meetings on February 16th and February 28th, respectively. Within each page, you can scroll down to view Accomplishments for FY2022, Goals & Initiatives for FY2023, and FY2023 Budget Highlights. Charts and tables have been included to show a detailed breakdown of each department’s operating budget. At the end of the Budget Highlights section, you can click on the bullet “Click here to see BUDGET INCREASE RATIONALE FORMS” to view supporting detail regarding any requested changes greater than $1,000. You can also view supplemental budget information (if applicable) by clicking on the link included at the bottom of certain department pages, “Click here to see SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET AND DEPARTMENT INFORMATION”. Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.09.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 2 of 3 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator The Select Board and the Finance Committee discussed department budgets with the respective department heads as follows: Early Morning Session: Police Department- Chief Eldredge Town Clerk- Colette Williams Building Department – F. Davis Walters Health Department – Amy von Hone Department of Public Works – Griffin Ryder Break Late Morning Session: Natural Resources Department- Chris Miller Planning- Lynn St. Cyr Council on Aging- Denise Rego Ladies Library- Cindy St. Amour Town Buildings & Maintenance- Tom Thatcher Town Moderator, Finance Committee/Reserve Fund, Legal, Veteran Services, - presented by Mr. Lombardi and Ms. Kalinick Lunch Break -Selectperson Hoffman moved to adjourn for recess. Selectperson Chatelain second. A role call vote was taken; the vote was 5-Yes, 0-No. Finance Committee member Andy Evans moved to adjourn for recess. Finance Committee member Bob Tobias second. A role call vote was taken; the Finance Committee voted, 5-Yes, 0-No. Finance Committee Vice Chair Bridges read the meeting participation and recording statements. A quorum was declared, and all Finance Committee members present were announced. Chair Bingham called the meeting to order. Select Board members present were announced, a quorum was declared. Afternoon Session: 1PM Fire Department- Chief Moran Water Enterprise- Paul Anderson Golf Department- Jay Packett Recreation Department – Mike Gradone Finance Department: Assessing (James Gallagher), Information Technology (Kathy Lambert), Treasure/Collector (Lisa Vitale) Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04 Town of Brewster 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 Phone: (508) 896-3701 Fax: (508) 896-8089 BoS 02.09.2022 www.brewster-ma.gov Page 3 of 3 Office of: Select Board Town Administrator The following departments budget presentation were moved to the joint meeting with the Select Board and Finance Committee on Wednesday February 16, 2022, at 6pm: Finance Department: Accounting, Benefits & Debt Administration, Town Hall Operations, Human Resources & All Others Adjournment Selectperson Chaffee moved to adjourn at 3:50pm. Selectperson Whitney second. A roll call vote was taken. Selectperson Chaffee-yes, Selectperson Hoffmann- yes, Selectperson Chatelain-yes, Selectperson Whitney- yes, Chair Bingham-yes. The Board vote was 5-Yes, 0-No. Finance Committee member Meehan moved to adjourn. Member Tobias second. A roll call vote was taken. Member Tobias- yes, Member Pivirotto-yes, Member Evan-yes, Member Young- yes, Member Meehan-yes, Member Henchy-yes. Vice Chair Bridges-yes. The Finance Committee Board vote was 7-Yes, 0-No Respectfully submitted by Erika Mawn, Executive Assistant Approved: __________________ Signed: _________________________________________ Date Selectperson Chatelain, Clerk of the Select Board Approved: __________________ Signed: _________________________________________ Date Member Meehan, Clerk of the Finance Committee Link to the Town of Brewster online budget book: https://stories.opengov.com/brewsterma/published/vNFj7_V0i. 03 / 01 / 2022 Doc ID: d16e2a218521c45b8a2009756ae8f4b3a303cf04